n  ed. 


W8i 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


TO  ESTABLISH  AN  INDEPENDENT 
HEALTH  SERVICE 


Wb'-n  n  question  like  this  confronts  u.s  the  people  of  this  country  '.n<1 

r   look  to   their  liberties. 

"The  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  is  not  a  medical  !>:nly,  his  n<> 
right  to  a  medical  opinion,  and  should  not  dare  take  sides  in  medical 
controversies." — Prof.  William  James. 

.I»r-jis  of  Nazareth  was  persecuted  and   finally  crucified  for  ^rencnrng 

•  spel   and   practicing  his  religious  belief  by  healing  the  sielc.     To 

-Jrtine  to-day  in  the  twentieth  century  in  the  great  State  nt  New 

York,   ii'  he  were  here,   would  make  him  a  criminal  suhject  to  line  and 

imprisonment  by  the  laws  of  that  State. 


SPEECH 


OF 


HON.  JOHN  JV  WORKS 


OF 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


MONDAY  AND  TUESDAY,  AITJL  29  AND  30,  1912 


WASHINGTON 

410J7— lOOr.9 


53 


SPEECH 

OF 

HON.  JOHN   D.  WORKS, 

Monday  and  Tuesday,  April  29  and  30,  1912, 


On  tho  bill  (S.  1)  to  establish  an  independent  Health  Service,  and  for 
other  purposes — 

Mr.  WOKKS  said: 

Mr.  PRESIDENT  :  I  had  tho  honor,  soon  after  I  became  a  Mem- 
ber of  this  body,  to  discuss  this  bill  from  the  standpoint  of 
Christian  Scientists,  to  whom,  in  its  then  form,  it  was  most  ob- 
jectionable. Since  then  it  has  been  amended  in  a  number. of 
material  particulars,  relieving  it,  in  some  respects,  from  the 
objections  then  urged  against  it.  At  this  time  I  desire  to  con- 
sider it  in  a  broader  and  more  comprehensive  way,  as  it  affects 
not  Christian  Scientists  alone  but  the  whole  people.  This  will 
necessarily  lead  me  to  comment  not  only  upon  the  bill  as  it 
appears  on  its  face,  but  upon  the  forces  and  motives  behind 
it,  and  the  ultimate  objects  and  purposes  of  this  movement,  who 
want  it,  and  what  for. 

I  am  sorry  that  I  feel  myself  impelled  by  a  sense  of  duty  to 
say  some  unpleasant  things,  but  I  shall  say  them  as  pleasantly 
as  I  can,  and  without  any  intention  of  giving  offense.  I  shall 
have  to  question  and  challenge  some  of  the  most  cherished  be- 
liefs and  convictions  of  Members  of  this  body  and  of  many 
other  good  people,  convictions  sincerely  and  honestly  enter- 
tained by  them.  But  I  am  happy  to  say  that  I  entertain  no 
sense  of  malice,  hatred,  or  ill  will  toward  any  human  being, 
alive  or  dead,  or  of  unfriendly  antagonism  toward  the  views, 
honestly  entertained,  of  any  man.  I.-  shall  not  hesitate,  how- 
ever, to  speak  uiy  own  convictions  freely  and  frankly  and  to 
point  out  and  comment  without,  reserve  upon  some  of  the  evils 
that  are  attempted  to  be  maintained  and  perpetuated  by  this 
bill  and  legislation  which  is  expected  to  follow  it. 

I  shall  feel  myself  called  upon  to  assail  the  motives  and 
conduct  of  members  of  the  medical  profession,  in  their  organ- 
ized form,  as  the  American  Medical  Association.  But  this  is  in 
no  sense  a  personal  matter,  nor  is  it  prompted  by  any  sense  of 
ill  will.  There  are  many  high-minded,  noble,  self-sacri (icing 
men  and  women  in  the  profession  who  are  conscientiously  de 
voting  their  lives  to  the  healing  of  disease  and  the  amelioration 
of  human  suffering.  In  what  I  shall  say  on  this  subject,  I  am 
not  speaking  of  such  as  these,  but  of  the  self-seeking,  intolerant 
political  doctors  who  are  serving  their  own  sellish  interests 
and  not  the  public  good. 

The  avowed  purpose  of  seeking  new  legislation  was,  in  the 
beginning,    to   establish    a    department   of   (Jovernmeut   with   a 
41917     109G9 


doctor  of  medicine  at  its  head,  a  member  of  the  President's 
Cabinet,  possessed  of  the  almost  autocratic,  unlimited,  and 
unrestrained  power  belonging  to  such  a  department.  This 
movement  was  instigated  and  maintained  by  the  American 
Medical  Association,  one  of  the  most  powerful  trusts,  in  its 
management,  in  the  country.  While  there  were  many  sincere 
and  honest,  but  misguided,  people  inside  and  outside  of  the 
association  behind  it,  the  motive  power  which  was  pressing  it 
forward  was  this  political  branch  of  the  association.  Its  officials 
and  agents,  with  their  powerful  organization,  were  simply 
using  its  members  and  others  less  selfish  and  unpopular  to  de- 
ceive the  public  and  Congress  and  conceal  the  real  motives  that 
actuated  the  effort.  This  motive  and  the  real  object,  purely 
selfish  on  their  part,  were  studiously  and  skillfully  concealed 
under  the  mask  of  humanitarianism.  The  League  for  Medical 
Freedom,  a  voluntary  organization  composed  of  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  citizens  of  all  classes  in  all  walks  of  life,  knowing 
the  hypocrisy  of  the  instigators  of  new  legislation  on  this  sub- 
ject, made  common  cause  against  it  and  have  exposed  its  ob- 
jects and  pointed  out  the  injurious  effects  of  the  passage  of  the 
proposed  bill.  One  of  the  chief  causes  of  complaint  was  that 
it  would  create  a  monopoly  in  one  school  of  medicine,  with 
one  of  their  number,  a  Cabinet  officer,  at  its  head,  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  every  other  school  of  medicine  or  other  modes  of  healing. 
This  purpose  was  disclaimed  by  the  author  of  the  bill,  the  Sen- 
ator from  Oklahoma  [Mr.  OWEN],  but  the  form  of  the  bill,  the 
fact  that  then  and  now  all  surgeons  and  other  medical  em- 
ployees of  the  Government  were  and  are  of  that  school  of 
medicine,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others,  and  the  declarations  of 
parties  interested  in  the  bill  as  to  their  ultimate  object  and 
purpose  in  urging  the  passage  of  it  showed  conclusively  that 
the  Senator  from  Oklahoma  was  entirely  mistaken. 

It  became  so  apparent  that  such  was  the  purpose,  and  it  was 
so  obnoxious  to  every  man  who  believes  in  medical  as  well  as 
religious  freedom,  that  friends  of  the  bill  voluntarily  offered 
the  following  amendment  to  relieve  it  from  this  objection 
which  they  soon  found  would  defeat  it : 

And  provided  further,  That  the  bureau  of  health  established  by  this 
act  shall  have  no  power  to  regulate  the  practice  of  medicine  or  the 
practice  of  healing  or  to  interfere  with  the  right  of  a  citizen  to  employ 
the  practitioner  of  his  choice,  and  all  appointments  within  the  bureau, 
including  the  head  of  the  bureau,  shall  be  made  without  discrimination 
against  any  school  of  medicine  or  of  healing. 

They  soon  found,  also,  that  the  effort  to  secure  a  place  in 
the  Cabinet  and  make  the  health  bureau  a  department  of  the 
Government  was  hopeless,  and  that  was  abandoned. 

Thus  shorn  of  the  things  they  most  desired,  the  bill  has  be- 
come unnecessary  and  useless.  It  adds  no  power  to  the  several 
bureaus  in  the  different  departments  intended  to  protect  and 
preserve  the  public  health,  and  can  not  increase  their  activities, 
except  that  of  collecting  and  disseminating  information.  There- 
fore, if  I  did  not  know  that  this  abandonment  of  the  objection- 
able features  of  the  bill  was  for  the  ulterior  purpose  of  making 
it  a  beginning  and  then  following  it  up  step  by  step  until  they 
have  attained  their  original  object,  which  they  could  not  reach 
41917— 109G9 


by  direct  action,  I  should  have  but  little  reason  to  consume  the 
time  of  the  Senate  in  opposing  its  passage. 

But,  Mr.  President,  I  know  what  I  am  talking  about  when  I 
say  to  the  Senate  that  they  have  never  abandoned  their  original 
purpose  of  taking  over  into  their  own  hands  the  medical  activ- 
ities of  the  Government  and  of  confining  their  administration 
and  the  enforcement  of  their  powers  in  the  one  school  of  medi- 
cine to  the  exclusion  of  all  others.  As  I  shall  show  the  Senate 
a  little  later,  some  of  these  doctors  and  their  publications,  less 
discreet  than  some  others,  have  made  the  most  startling  state- 
ments of  their  intention  to  establish  and  control  a  state  medi- 
cine in  its  most  extreme  and  objectionable  form.  Since  the  bill 
has  been  amended,  as  I  have  stated,  I  said  to  one  of  the  most 
earnest  supporters  of  the  idea  of  a  department  of  medicine,  and 
a  distinguished  citizen  and  educator,  "  Why  do  you  want  this 
bill  in  its  amended  form?  It -does  not  increase  the  powers  of 
the  medical  bureaus  or  accomplish  anything  you  want."  He 
said,  "  It  is  not  satisfactory  to  us,  but  it  will  be  a  beginning 
and  we  will  follow  it  up  until  we  get  what  we  want,"  or  words 
to  that  effect. 

This  was  a  frank  and  perfectly  honest  declaration  of  their 
purpose  and  intention,  and  their  reason,  and  the  only  plausible 
reason,  for  accepting  a  bill  with  everything  that  they  really 
wanted  taken  out  of  it  by  amendment. 

Therefore,  Mr.  President,  I  am  going  to  consider  this  bill 
precisely  as  if  it  provided  in  terms  for  the  things  to  which  I 
so  seriously  object,  because  that  is  the  ultimate  purpose  which 
should  be  met  at  the  outset,  and  this  bill  is  only  one  step  to- 
ward its  final  accomplishment.  But  for  the  final  object  in  view 
the  bill  would  not  be  worth  the  attention  of  its  alleged  friends. 

Mr.  President,  there  are  various  healing  agencies  at  work  in 
this  country  to-day.  Some  are  schools  of  medical  healing  which 
depend  upon  drugs  as  the  means  of  cure.  Others  depend  upon 
manipulation  of  the  body ;  others  depend  upon  the  action  of 
one  mind  upon  another  as  a  means  of  healing ;  and  still  an- 
other upon  the  operation  of  the  Divine  mind  in  the  establish- 
ment of  harmony,  the  regeneration  of  man  and  his  restoration 
to  health  by  that  means.  To  the  latter  the  use  of  drugs  is 
regarded  as  a  menace  to  life  and  health  and  opposed  to  their 
conscientious  religious  beliefs. 

These  different  schools  and  other  modes  of  healing  may  be 
divided  into  groups.  It  is  impossible  in  the  scope  of  such  an 
address  as  this  to  consider  or  even  mention  them  all.  I  will, 
therefore,  confine  myself  to  a  few  of  the  leading  ones  of  each 
class.  In  the  schools  of  healing  by  drugs  may  be  named  tho 
allopaths,  the  homeopaths,  and  the  eclectics.  The  healing  by 
the  action  of  one  mind  over  another  may  be  classed  under  the 
general  designation  of  mesmerism,  hypnotism,  or  suggestHn — all 
meaning  practically  the  same  thing — and  Christian  Science, 
the  one  distinctive  mode  of  healing  by  the  operation  of  the 
Divine  mind  according  to  the  teachings  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

No  two  of  these  schools  of  medicine,  or  other  modes  of  heal- 
ing, agree  with  each  other.  While  some  of  them  agree  in  the 
use  of  drugs  as  a  means  of  healing,  they  are  entirely  at  variance 
as  to  the  kinds  of  medicines  to  be  used,  the  quantity  to  be  ad- 
ministered, and  the  principle  upon  which  the  system  of  drug 
41917— 109G9 


6 

healing  is  based.  The  allopathic  school  of  medicine  is  the  oldest 
and  best  known.  Its  devotees  are  wholly  dogmatic  and  intoler- 
ant. They  assume  I Ii.it  ("..ore  is  no  other  efficacious  mode  of 
healing  but  theirs,  and  that  all  other  practitioners  are  incom- 
petents and  a  menace  to  the  public  health.  They  have  formed 
one  of  the  most  powerful  organizations  of  any  kind  in  the 
country.  They  are  ruthlessly  using  that  power  not  to  improve 
the  practitioners  of  their  own  school  only  but  to  coerce  all 
people  to  accept  their  remedies  and  to  suppress,  by  law  and  by 
persecution,  the  practice  of  other  means  of  healing.  The 
American  Medical  Association  is  working  in  every  State  in  the 
Union  to  secure  laws  which  will  prevent  any  but  practitioners 
of  their  school  from  practicing  the  art  of  healing.  They  have 
secured  such  laws  in  some  of  the  States,  as  I  shall  show  farther 
along,  and  are  tireless  in  their  efforts  to  secxire  other  like  re- 
strictive laws  in  all  other  States.  Having  only  partially  suc- 
ceeded in  their  efforts  in  this  direction  in  the  States,  they  have 
for  a  long  time  been  besieging  Congress  to  help  them  to  entrench 
themselves  with  all  the  powers  of  the  Government  behind  them 
where  they  will  be  supreme  and  may  absolutely  exclude  all 
other  practitioners  than  theirs  from  the  practice  of  healing. 
They  are  using  all  the  money  and  influence  they  can  bring  to 
bear  and  are  practicing  on  the  credulity  of  an  ignorant  public 
sentiment  by  the  pretense  that  all  of  this  is  for  the  public  good. 
Through  their  efforts  the  much-dreaded  practice  of  vaccination, 
which  has,  in  my  opinion,  sacrificed  more  lives  than  it  has  saved 
and  maimed  and  made  invalids  of  thousands,  has  been  made 
compulsory  by  law ;  and  now  other  serum  remedies,  alleged  to 
be  preventives  of  various  diseases  and  equally  dangerous,  loath- 
some, and  objectionable,  are  being  forced  upon  the  people 
whether  they  want  them  or  not. 

The  officers  of  the  Army  and  Navy  are  the  willing  instruments 
of  these  medical  men  to  compel  American  citizens  to  submit  to 
be  poisoned  with  their  loathsome  preparations.  If  a  soldier  or 
sailor  refuses  to  submit  to  vaccination  or  other  serum  treat- 
ment for  typhoid  fever  and  other  diseases,  he  is  promptly  dis- 
missed the  service,  or  placed  in  irons  until  he  submits,  or  is 
otherwise  punished.  And  now  these  doctors  want  Congress  to 
so  legislate  as  to  give  them  full  control  of  the  medical,  sani- 
tary, and  hygienic  activities  and  bureaus  of  the  Government 
that  their  powers  may  be  complete. 

The  doctors  of  this  school  hold  every  medical  position  in  the 
Government,  to  the  exclusion  of  every  other  school,  and  no  one 
who  believes  in  the  prevention  or  healing  of  disease  by  any 
other  means  than  theirs  need  apply. 

Mr.  President,  the  one  great  trouble  is  that  the  people  do  not 
think  for  themselves  in  any  matter  affecting  the  public  health. 
They  have  preferred  to  rely  upon  the  doctors  and  to  be  guided 
and  controlled  by  them.  Public  officials  and  the  Congress  of 
the  United  States  do  not  trouble  themselves  about  it  or  hold 
themselves  responsible.  They  generally  evince  a  sublime  indif- 
ference to  the  subject  beyond  what  the  doctors  say  or  recom- 
mend, and  the  people  are  fleeced  of  millions  of  dollars  in  al- 
leged works  for  the  public  health  which  had  better  be  thrown 
away.  They  have  much  more  faith  in  the  doctors  than  the 
doctors  have  in  themselves  or  in  each  other.  The  competent 
41917—10969 


doctor  has  long  since  learned  that  drugs  are  a  poison  and  that 
they  do  not  heal.  Consequently  the  conscientious  doctor  no 
longer  gives  or  advises  the  giving  or  taking  of  drugs.  But  the 
incompetent  and  selfish  and  unworthy  still  makes  his  living  that 
way. 

The  allopathic  school  of  medicine  is  noted  for  the  quantity  of 
medicines  they  administer  and  their  nauseous  and  distasteful 
character— so  much  so  that  their  mode  of  treatment  is  often 
characterized  as  cruel  and  inhuman.  So  deleterious  and  harm- 
ful are  their  drugs  that  the  homeopaths  claim  that  a  large  part 
cf  their  practice  comes  from  those  who  have  temporarily  or 
permanently  suffered  from  the  effects  of  allopathic  drugs.  But 
I  am  glad  to  say  that  the  better  and  more  intelligent  physicians 
of  their  school  have  given  up  the  use  of  their  strong  drugs  in 
a  great  degree.  Their  experience  has  taught  them  that  such 
drugs  do  not  heal,  but  engender  and  cause  disease.  Let  us 
hope  that  they  may  soon  reach  that  degree  of  intelligence  that 
will  lead  them  to  cease  the  use  of  any  drugs  altogether.  It 
would  be  a  blessing  to  the  human  race  if  they  would  at  the 
same  time  teach  their  patients  to  know  what  they  have  learned, 
that  an  inanimate  drug  has  no  healing  quality  and  had  better 
not  be  used.  The  people  have  been  erroneously  taught  to  rely 
upon  drugs  for  their  healing  and  have  blindly  believed  in  them 
so  long  that  to  deprive  them  of  them  would  be  disastrous  until 
they  learn  that  lesson.  Drugs  and  the  drug  doctors'  ministra- 
tion of  them  have  healed  disease  only  because  of  the  faith  of 
the  patient  in  the  doctor  and  his  drugs,  and  for  no  other  reason. 
Doctors  themselves  bear  witness  to  this  fact. 

In  speaking  of  this  subject,  Dr.  William  Osier,  formerly  of 
Johns  Hopkins  Medical  School,  in  an  article  in  the  Americana, 
uses  this  language : 

Yet  after  all  the  psychical  method  has  always  played  an  Important 
though  largely  unrecognized  part  in  therapeutics.  It  is  from  faith, 
which  buoys  up  the  spirits,  sets  the  blood  flowing  more  freely,  and  the 
nerves  playing  their  parts  without  disturbance,  that  a  large  part  of  all 
cures  arises.  Despondency,  or  lack  of  faith,  will  often  sink  the  stoutest 
constitution  almost  to  death's  door  ;  faith  will  enable  a  bread  pill  or  a 
spoonful  of  clear  water  to  do  almost  miracles  of  healing  when  the  best 
medicines  have  been  given  over  in  despair.  The  basis  of  the  entire 
profession  of  medicine  is  faith  in  the  doctor  and  his  drugs  and  his 
methods.  This  is  no  new  discovery.  It  was  said  by  Galen  that  "  he 
works  the  most  cures  in  whom  most  have  faith,"  and  the  doctor-chemist- 
charlatan  Paracelsus,  who  died  of  taking  a  universal  panacea  too 
poisonous  even  for  his  confidence,  told  his  patients  to  have  full  faith 
and  a  strong  imagination  and  they  would  see  the  effects  of  it. 

This  is  strong  language  to  come  from  such  a  source.  The 
truth  of  it  will  not  be  denied  by  any  well-informed  and  con- 
scientious medical  practitioner. 

I  ask  the  Senate  to  consider  carefully  this  one  statement  con- 
tained in  this  article : 

The  basis  of  the  entire  profession  of  medicine  is  faith  in  the  doctor 
and  his  drugs  and  his  methods. 

That  is  a  remarkable  statement.  It  comes  from  an  eminent 
and  noted  medical  practitioner  of  the  allopathic  school,  and  is 
a  permanent  contribution  to  the  mass  of  information  on  the 
subject  that  can  not  be  entered  upon  here,  appearing  as  it  does 
in  one  of  the  lending  modern  encyclopedias. 

41017 — 10009 


8 

Mr.  President,  I  may  be  pardoned  if  I  stop  here  to  point  out 
the  difference  between  the  patients  of  medical  practitioners  and 
Christian  Scientists  in  respect  of  this  question  of  faith.  The 
believer  in  the  doctor  and  his  drugs  has  faith  in  a  human  being 
and  his  means  of  cure,  while  the  Christian  Scientist  has  un- 
shaken and  supreme  faith  in  the  omnipotence  and  beneficent 
influence  of  the  Divine  Being  in  the  healing  of  disease.  I  leave 
it  to  the  candid  judgment  of  Senators  to  say  which  of  these  is 
most  worthy  of  faith  and  trust.  But  the  Christian  Scientist 
does  not  rest  on  faith  alone,  but  upon  such  understanding  as  he 
has  of  the  power  of  God  to  heal  and  upon  good  works  by  which 
that  healing  may  be  brought  about. 

The  drugging  system  of  the  homeopathic  school  cf  medicine 
is  entirely  different  from  that  of  the  allopathic  school  and  is 
founded  on  a  wholly  different  principle.  I  have  no  doubt  its 
rise  was  largely  due  to  the  protest  against  the  cruel  and  in- 
human practices  of  the  old  school. 

There  are  some  commendable  features  of  homeopathic  medica- 
tion as  compared  with  the  old  school.  Their  medicines  are  less 
in  quantity  and  not  so  nauseous  or  distasteful,  and  while  they 
can  no  more  heal  disease,  except  by  faith,  than  can  the  allo- 
pathic drugs,  they  are  far  less  injurious  to  the  human  system. 
They  are  less  harmful  to  humanity,  and  that  is  a  good  deal. 

Then  came  the  modern  school  of  eclectics.  The  theory  of 
practice  adopted  by  this  school  is  entirely  different  from  the 
others.  Its  founder  and  his  followers  were  still  searching  for 
a  better  means  of  healing  disease  and  saving  human  life. 
And  still  mankind  is  not  satisfied.  It  is  beginning  to  be  under- 
stood now  by  all  medical  practitioners  that  the  one  great  thing 
to  be  done  is  not  to  heal  disease,  in  which  they  have  signally 
failed,  but  to  prevent  it.  They  have  learned,  too,  that  the  way 
to  prevent  disease  is  not  by  the. use  of  drugs,  in  the  form  of 
serums  or  otherwise,  but  in  removing  the  extraneous  causes 
of  disease  and  preventing  them  from  reaching  the  human  body. 
It  is  generally  believed  by  all  civilized  and  enlightened  people 
that  lack  of  sanitation  is,  as  men  see  things,  one  of  the  most 
prolific  causes  of  disease  and  death.  To  this  all  schools  of 
medicine  and  healing  agree.  Veritably  cleanliness  is  next  to 
godliness.  But  sanitation  is  not  so  much  the  work  of  the  doctors 
or  other  practitioners  as  it  is  of  the  skilled  sanitary  engineer.  It 
is  claimed  to  have  been  discovered  that  the  sting  of  the  mosquito 
causes  yellow  fever,  the  bite  of  the  fly  typhoid  fever,  and  that 
the  ground  squirrel  is  the  carrier  of  bubonic  plague.  What  is 
the  remedy?  Obviously,  to  exterminate  the  mosquito,  the  fly, 
and  the  ground  squirrel.  This  does  not  require  the  services  of 
a  doctor  or  the  use  of  a  drug.  When  either  of  these  breeders 
and  disseminators  of  disease  escapes  and  the  disease  is  trans- 
mitted to  the  human  body,  the  doctor,  with  his  drugs,  is  help- 
less to  give  relief. 

Going  a  little  further  in  respect  of  the  different  modes  of 
healing,  we  have  the  osteopathic  school.  It  does  not  rely  upon 
or  use  drugs,  but  relies  on  the  intrinsic  powers  of  the  human 
body  itself  to  restore  healthy  conditions. 

We  have  also  the  practice  of  hypnotism,  mesmerism,  and 
suggestion.  This  alleged  means  of  healing,  including  "  sugges- 
tion," so  called,  is  very  largely  used  now  by  the  old-school  phy- 

41917—10009 


9 

sician.     It  is  an  admission  of  the  inefficacy  of  drugs.     But  it  is 
even  more  dangerous  in  its  use  than  the  drugs  themselves. 

In  18GG  the  principle  of  healing,  which  is  known  as  Christian 
Science,  came  into  use,  and  is  very  generally  practiced.  It, 
too,  discards  the  use  of  drugs.  Unlike  all  the  other  modes  of 
healing  that  I  have  mentioned,  it  is  religious  in  its  character. 
The  healing  is  not  its  religion,  but  is  incidental  to  and  results 
from  its  religion.  Its  healing  is  not  confined  to  its  own  religious 
believers,  but  is  open  to  all  men. 

MOTIVE     FOE    ACTIVITY     OF     AMERICAN     MEDICAL     ASSOCIATIOX. 

There  is  abundant  evidence,  which  can  not  be  reviewed  here, 
that  the  efforts  of  the  American  Medical  Association  to  secure 
restrictive  legislation  affecting  other  schools  of  healing  and 
legislation  giving  its  school  additional  powers  and  privileges  are 
selfish  in  the  extreme  and  intolerant  and  oppressive,  as  I  shall 
show  further  along.  The  motive  of  this  is  not  far  to  seek. 
Of  later  years,  not  only  have  the  more  modern  schools  of  medi- 
cine encroached  upon  the  business  of  the  allopathic  doctors  and 
interfered  with  their  receipts,  but  thousands — yes,  millions — of 
people  in  this  country  have  learned  not  to  use  medicines  in  any 
form,  much  to  their  advantage  in  the  way  of  economy  and  bet- 
ter health.  As  a  result,  inroads  of  the  most  serious  nature 
have  been  made  on  the  doctor's  business  and  profits,  besides 
bringing  their  practice  into  serious  discredit.  It  was  perfectly 
apparent  that  something  must  be  done  to  save  their  credit  and 
prevent  the  overthrow  of  their  system  of  practice.  It  was  a 
desperate  case,  and  they  have  resorted  to  desperate  and  ques- 
tionable means  to  protect  their  profession  from  ruin.  This 
movement  is  not  in  the  interest  of  humanity,  as  they  would 
have  us  believe,  but  to  uphold  the  prestige  and  protect  the  re- 
sources of  the  doctors  of  the  old  school  of  medicine.  Their  own 
declarations  prove  this  beyond  controversy.  I  shall  a  little 
further  along  submit  for  the  consideration  of  the  Senate  some 
of  their  own  declarations  to  that  effect,  to  which  others,  almost 
without  number,  might  be  added,  if  it  were  necessary,  coupled 
with  the  most  startling  statements  of  the  extraordinary  means 
resorted  to  to  accomplish  their  object. 

There  is  no  public  demand  for  this  legislation.  There  is  no 
sentiment  in  favor  of  it  except  that  of  one  school  of  medicine 
and  such  as  they  have  manufactured  in  their  own  selfish  in- 
terests under  the  hypocritical  pretense  that  it  is  for  the  public 
good. 

HOW    THEY    OPERATE, 

f 

The  doctors  of  the  old  school  had  possession.  The  people 
had  become  dependent  upon  them  for  help  because  they  had  not 
yet  learned  a  better  way.  It  was  the  fear  that  they  would  find 
a  better  way  that  spurred  them  to  action.  They  have  not  been 
willing  to  stand  upon  their  merits  and  be  judged  by  their  fruits; 
they  have  fought  and  persecuted  evei-y  new  school  or  mode  of 
healing.  They  have  appealed  to  the  legislatures  of  the  States 
for  laws  that  were  prohibitory  of  other  schools  and  making  the 
practice  of  medicine  by  them  a  crime,  and  have  succeeded  in 
many  of  the  States  in  procuring  such  legislation.  Their  favorite 
scheme  is  to  have  established  a  board  of  health  in  every  State, 

41917—10969 


and  °very  county  in  every  State,  composed  of  doctors  of  their 
school,  and  then  procure  a  law  making  it  a  criminal  offense  to 
practice  medicine  or  healing  without  first  securing  a  license  to 
practice  from  their  board  of  health.  They  opposed  and  perse- 
cuted the  homeopaths,  the  eclectics,  and  the  ost*?opaths  in  turn, 
denouncing  them  as  charlatans,  quacks,  and  incompetents.  None 
of  these  could,  in  the  beginning  of  these  tactics,  procure  one  of 
their  licenses  to  practice.  But  this  did  not  work  very  long.  As 
these  other  schools  of  medicine  became  stronger  and  better  ap- 
preciated by  the  people  legislatures  refused  to  pass  these  pro- 
hibitory laws,  and  governors  of  States  sometimes  vetoed  them 
if  they  were  passed. 

The  new  schools  have  forced  their  way  into  public  favor, 
notwithstanding  all  this  unjust  opposition,  and  now  other 
schools  of  medicine  are  given  places  on  boards  of  health  and 
applicants  for  licenses  to  practice  by  physicians  of  their  schools 
are  given  separate  examinations  by  members  of  their  own  pro- 
fession. Every  new  school  or  method  of  healing  has  been  com- 
pelled to  meet  with  this  same  kind  of  unjust  opposition  and  per- 
secution, and  much  of  it  has  been  accomplished  through  the 
legislatures  of  the  States.  Many  of  the  better  class  of  allo- 
pathic physicians  have  deplored  and  opposed  this  mode  of  meet- 
ing opposition.  It  has  been  done  mostly  by  and  through  the 
American  Medical  Association.  To  secure  such  restrictive  and 
prohibitory  legislation  has  been  one  of  the  chief  objects  of  the 
association.  Of  later  years  their  efforts  have  been  directed 
more  particularly  against  the  Christian  Scientists.  The  associa- 
tion has  its  branches  and  emissaries  in  every  State  and  every 
city  of  any  size  in  every  State,  They  infest  the  legislatures  of 
every  State  in  the  Union  and  present  bills  at  every  session  until 
they  succeed  in  securing  the  restrictive  laws  they  want  At  this 
present  day  they  generally  fail,  but  they  continue  their  efforts 
•with  an  energy  and  persistency  worthy  of  a  better  cause.  In 
some  of  the  States,  notably  in  Maryland,  Ohio,  and  Missouri, 
they  have  made  it  a  crime  for  a  Christian  Scientist  to  practice 
healing  or  to  accept  compensation  therefor. 

A  conspicuous  illustration  of  their  methods  may  be  found  in 
a  late  order  procured  by  the  doctors  affecting  the  Panama  Canal 
Zone.  They  had  an  allopathic  board  of  health,  with  a  former 
president  of  the  American  Medical  Association  at  its  head. 
They  procured  from  the  President  an  order  in  the  following 
form : 

EXECUTIVE    ORDER    TO    PROHIBIT    THK     PRACTICE     OF     MEDICINE.     SORCERY, 
DENTISTRY,   PHARMACY,   OK  MIDWIFERY    WITHOUT   A   LICENSE. 

By  virtue  of  the  authority  vested  la  me,  I  hereby  establish  the  fol- 
lowing order  for  the  Canal  Zone : 

SECTION  1.  It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  practice  or  attempt 
to  practice  medicine,  surgery,  deptistry.  pharmacy,  or  midwifery  within 
the  Canal  Zone  without  first  having  obtained  a'  license  therefor  from 
the  Board  of  Health  of  the  Canal  Zone.  Any  person  thus  offending 
shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  not  exceeding  twenty-five  dollars  ($25)  or  by 
imprisonment  in  jail  not  exceeding  thirty  (30)  days,  or  by  both  such  fine 
and  imprisonment,  in  the  discretion  of  the  court :  Provided.  That  tui.s 
order  shall  not  apply  to  commissioned  surgeons  of  the  United  States 
Army,  and  Navy  or  Marine-Hospital  Service,  nor  to  physicians,  surgeons, 
dentists,  or  pharmacists  and  their  assistants  and  nurses  employed  by  the 
Isthmian  Canal  Commission,  nor  to  nurses  acting  under  the  orders  of  a 
licensed  physician 

SEC.  2.  Any  person  shall  be  regn rd>-d  as  practicing  medicine  within 
the  meaning  of  this  order  who  shall  prescribe  for,  operate  on,  or  in 
41017— 1090ft 


11 

any  wise  attempt  to  heal,  cure,  or  alleviate,  or  who  shall  In  any  wise 
treat  any  disease  or  any  physical  or  mental  ailment  of  another : 
Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  order  shall  be  construed  to  prohibit 
gratuitous  services  iu  case  of  emergency  or  to  the  administering  of 
ordinary  household  remedies. 

SEC.  3.  This  order  shall  take  effect  sixty  (60)  days  from  and  after 
this  date. 

WM.  H.  TAFT. 

THE  WHITE  HOUSE,  October  H,  1911. 

It  will  be  seen  that  they  so  defined  the  practice  of  medicine 
in  this  order  as  to  make  it  a  crime  to  attempt  to  ameliorate 
sickness  or  disease  in  any  form  or  by  any  means  other  than 
their  own. 

Section  2  of  the  order  would  have  had  the  effect  to  exclude 
from  practice  in  the  Canal  Zone  every  school  of  medicine  except 
the  allopathic  school,  including  Christian  Scientists  and  any 
and  all  persons  who  attempted  to  cure  disease  or  alleviate 
suffering  in  any  way  by  prayer  or  any  means  not  included  in 
the  term  "  practicing  medicine." 

Section  3  provided  in  express  terms  "  that  any  person  shall 
be  regarded  as  practicing  medicine  within  the  meaning  of  this 
order  who  shall  in  any  wise  attempt  to  heal,  cure,  or  alleviate, 
or  who  shall  in  any  wise  treat  any  disease  or  any  physical  or 
mental  ailment  of  another."  There  was  no  exemption  what- 
ever made  of  any  mode  of  treatment.  The  evident  purpose  of 
the  order,  as  drawn,  was  to  give  the  allopathic  school  of  medi- 
cine absolute  and  unlimited  control  of  medical  affairs  in  the 
Canal  Zone  to  the  exclusion  of  every  other  mode  of  healing. 

When  the  attention  of  the  President  was  called  to  this  fact 
he  said  at  once  that  he  had  understood  that  Christian  Scientists 
were  not  to  be  disturbed  in  their  practice  by  the  order,  and  that 
if  it  could  be  construed  as  having  that  effect  he  would  see  that 
it  was  modified.  The  matter  was  taken  up  with  the  President 
and  the  Secretary  of  War,  who  gave  it  the  most  careful  and  con- 
scientious attention,  and  finally  modified  the  order  by  inserting 
the  following  clause : 

Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  order  shall  be  construed  to  prohibit 
(a)  the  practice  of  the  religious  tenets  of  any  church  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  sick  or  suffering  by  mental  or  spiritual  means  without 
the  use  of  any  drug  or  material  remedy,  whether  gratuitously  or  for 
compensation,  provided  that  such  sanitary  laws,  orders,  rules,  and 
regulations  as  now  are,  or  hereafter  may  be,  in  force  in  said  Canal 
Zone  are  complied  with. 

Christian  Scientists  made  no  objection  to  the  provision  in  the 
order  protecting  the  sanitary  regulations  of  the  Canal  Zone  and 
their  enforcement,  but  frankly  said  to  the  President  and  Secre- 
tary of  War  that  they  believed  in  sanitation,  and  that  the  order 
might  be  made  as  strong  with  respect  to  that  matter  as  they  de- 
sired to  have  it. 

But,  Mr.  President,  this  Canal  Zone  order  was  not  the  only 
law,  by  many,  obtained  and  attempted  to  be  obtained  by  the 
American  Medical  Association.  Every  State  in  the  Union  has 
some  law  regulating  the  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery,  and 
every  State  has  a  State  board  of  health  or  examiners  from  whom 
a  license  must  be  obtained  to  entitle  anyone  to  practice  medicine 
or  surgery.  The  doctors  have  gone  to  extraordinary  lengths  in 
the  attempt  to  protect  themselves  in  a  monopoly  of  healing  and 
to  exclude  from  the  exercise  of  their  rights  all  other  modes  of 
41017— 109G9 


healing  than  their  own.  In  the  procurement  of  boards  of  health, 
either  State  or  county,  the  allopathic  physicians,  acting  through 
the  American  Medical  Association,  usually  have  boards  com- 
posed solely  of  their  school  of  medicine,  or,  if  other  schools  are 
allowed  to  be  represented,  as  they  are  now  in  many  of  the 
States,  the  allopathic  school,  usually  called  by  themselves  "  reg- 
ulars," invariably  have  there  a  majority  or  a  greater  number  of 
members  on  the  board  than  that  of  any  other  school  of  medicine. 

In  some  of  the  States  separate  boards  of  examiners  or  health 
boards  are  provided  for  three  different  schools  of  medicine, 
namely,  the  regular  or  allopathic  school,  homeopaths,  and  eclec- 
tics. But  in  no  instance,  so  far  as  I  know,  is  a  majority  of 
members,  where  there  is  but  one  board,  given  to  any  but  the 
regular  school.  Having  procured  a  board  of  examiners,  or  board 
of  health,  as  they  are  sometimes  called,  they  seek  legislation  in 
the  different  States  providing  that  no  one  shall  practice  medi- 
cine or  surgery  until  they  have  procured  a  license  so  to  do  from 
such  board.  To  this  Christian  Scientists  would  make  no  objec- 
tion, as  they  are  not  practicing  medicine  or  surgery,  and  their 
mode  of  treatment  is  not  within  the  scope  of  the  title  to  these 
various  bills.  They  are  almost  invariably  given  the  title  of  bills 
"  to  regulate  the  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery,"  and  some- 
times midwifery,  as  indicated  in  the  title.  But  they  meet  this 
situation  by  providing  expressly  what  shall  be  included  in  the 
term  "  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery,"  and  so  define  the  term 
as  to  include  modes  of  healing  and  practice  that  are  not  within 
the  meaning  of  the  words  at  all. 

It  may  be  interesting  to  the  Senate  to  follow  in  a  brief  way 
the  course  of  legislation  on  this  subject. 

With  respect  to  the  body  of  the  laws  for  regulation  of  the 
practice  of  medicine  and  surgery,  these  laws,  with  very  few 
exceptions,  provide,  first,  that  no  one  shall  practice  without  first 
having  obtained  a  license  from  the  board  established  by  the  act. 
Then  they  provide  just  who  and  what  kinds  of  practice  shall 
be  included  within  the  terms  of  the  statute.  The  ingenuity  dis- 
played by  these  political  doctors  who  have  been  lobbying  for 
years  in  every  legislature  in  this  country  in  their  effort  to  in- 
sert in  these  laws  some  provision  that  will  maintain  their  mo- 
nopoly of  the  practice  and  exclude  everybody  else,  challenges 
my  admiration.  The  fact  that  many  of  such  laws  are  in  exactly 
the  same  language  shows  conclusively  that  they  have  been  the 
work  of  one  moving  power. 

I  am  going  to  trouble  the  Senate  by  a  brief  review  of  these 
different  statutory  provisions.  They  are  exceedingly  interest- 
ing. Of  course  where  the  statute  contains  no  definition  of  the 
practice  of  medicine  and  surgery,  no  mode  of  healing  that  does 
not  use  drugs  or  the  knife  would  be  included  in  its  terms  or 
affected  in  any  way.  Some  of  the  States  have  left  them  just 
in  that  condition,  and  therefore  such  modes  of  healing  may  be 
practiced  in  those  States  beyond  doubt. 

But,  taking  up  the  States  in  their  order:  In  Alabama  no 
exemption  is  contained  in  the  statute  affecting  the  question  I 
am  now  discussing,  and  the  definition  of  a  practitioner  within 
the  meaning  of  the  act  is  as  follows : 

Any  person   who   treats  or  of  era  to   treat,   diseases  of  human  beings 
by  any  system  whatsoever  is  considered  to  be  practicing  medicine. 
41017— 109G9 


13 

Nothing  could  be  more  absurd  or  unjust  than  this.  Everyone 
knows  that  the  Christian  Science  mode  of  practice,  for  exam- 
ple, is  not  practicing  medicine,  because  they  do  not  believe  in 
medicines  of  any  kind — do  not  use  them  or  prescribe  them — but 
are  conscientiously  opposed  to  their  use.  That  a  legislature 
of  a  State  should  falsify  the  facts,  as  is  done  in  an  act  of  this 
kind,  in  order  to  exclude  people  who  are  conscientiously  en- 
deavoring to  heal  disease  and  who  have  brought  health,  happiness, 
and  contentment  to  thousands  and  thousands  of  people  notwith- 
standing these  restrictive  laws,  is  almost  beyond  comprehension. 
It  has  been  done  at  the  instigation  of  medical  practitioners,  act- 
ing through  the  American  Medical  Association,  whose  attempt  is 
to  selfishly  retain  in  themselves  a  monopoly  of  healing  tnd 
exclude  everyone  else.  It  is  singular  that  the  legislature  of  a 
State  should  allow  itself  to  be  used  in  any  such  way. 

In  Arkansas  no  exemption  is  made,  and  when  I  say  no  ex- 
emption is  made  I  mean  as  affecting  the  question  which  I  am 
now  considering,  and  in  defining  the  scope  of  the  act  it  is  made 
to  include  anyone  who — 

prescribes  or  directs  for  the  use  of  any  person  or  persons  any  drug 
or  medicine  or  other  agency  for  the  treatment,  cure,  or  relief  of  any 
bodily  injury,  deformity,  or  disease. 

In  California  Christian  Scientists  are  excluded  from  the  ef- 
fects of  the  statute. 

In  the  State  of  Colorado  the  exempting  clause  provides : 

The  act  does  not  prohibit  gratuitous  service  in  case  of  emergency, 
nor  the  practice  of  the  religious  tenets  of  any  church. 

Under  this  exemption  the  courts  of  Colorado  have  held  that 
it  applies  only  to  the  exercise  of  religion  by  a  church  as  a 
body,  and  therefore  it  does  not  exempt  or  protect  a  Christian 
Science  practitioner,  who  exercises  the  right  of  healing,  from 
the  penalties  of  the  statute. 

In  the  following  States,  be  it  said  to  their  credit,  Christian 
Science  is  exempted  from  the  provisions  of  the  statute,  in 
express  terms :  Connecticut,  Massachusetts,  New  Hampshire, 
North  Dakota,  and  South  Dakota. 

In  the  following  States  the  definition  of  the  act  includes  the 
following  provision,  either  in  the  same  words  or  words  having 
the  same  meaning  and  effect :  Delaware,  Michigan,  Minnesota, 
Nevada,  and  New  Mexico : 

*  *  *  to  suggest,  recommend,  prescribe,  or  direct  for  the  use  of 
any  person  any  drug,  medicine,  appliance,  or  other  agency,  whether 
material  or  not  material,  for  the  cure,  relief,  or  palliation  of  any  ail- 
ment or  disease  cf  the  mind  or  the  body. 

In  the  District  of  Columbia  there  is  no  definition  of  the 
meaning  of  the  term  "  practicing  medicine  or  surgery,"  and 
therefore  Christian  Scientists,  of  course,  are  not  included 
within  its  provisions  or  penalties.  The  same  is  true  of  a  num- 
ber of  the  States. 

In  Georgia  the  act  is  made  to  include : 

Any  person  practicing  medicine  or  surgery  who  prescribes  for  the 
sick  or  those  in  need  of  medical  or  surgical  aid  and  who  charge  or 
receive  therefor  money  or  other  compensation  or  consideration  directly 
or  indirectly. 

41917—10069 


14 

The  meaning  and  effect  of  that  statute,  of  course,  turns  upon 
the  word  "  prescribes,"  which,  I  assume,  would  apply  only  to 
medical  treatment. 

The  statute  covering  Hawaii  includes: 

*  *      *     any  means  or  method  or  any  agent,   either  tangible  or  in- 
tangible, for  the  treatment  of  disease  in  the  human  subject. 

The  language  of  the  statute  of  Idaho,  in  defining  the  scope  of 
the  act,  is  not  as  clear  as  it  should  be,  but  according  to  my  con- 
struction of  it  it  includes  only  (as  every  statute  of  this  kind 
should)  medical  or  surgical  practitioners. 

In  the  State  of  Illinois  this  exempting  clause  is  found  in  the 
statute: 

Nothing  in  this  act  applies  to  *  *"  *  any  person  who  adminis- 
ters to  or  treats  the  sick  or  suffering  by  mental  or  spiritual  means 
without  the  use  of  any  drug  or  material  remedy. 

In  Indiana  there  is  no  exemption  and — 

*  *     *     to   heal,  cure,  or  relieve,   or   to  attempt  to  heal,   cure,   or 
relieve,  those  suffering  from  injury,  or  deformity,  or  disease  of  mind  or 
body — 

Is  included  in  the  term  "practice  of  medicine"  within  the 
meaning  of  the  act. 

In  Iowa  there  is  110  exemption,  and  it  is  provided  in  the  act 
that— 

Anyone  is  regarded  as  a  physician  who  publicly  professes  to  be  a 
physician,  surgeon,  or  obstetrician  and  assumes  the  duties  thereof,  or 
who  makes  a  practice  of  prescribing  and  furnishing  medicine  for  the 
sick,  or  who  publicly  professes  to  cure  or  heal. 

In  Kansas  the  exempting  clause  is  as  follows : 
Nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  as  interfering  with  any  reli- 
gious beliefs   in   the   treatment   of  disease :   Provided,   That   quarantine 
regulations  relating  to  contagious  diseases  are  not  infringed  on. 

In  Kentucky  the  definition  of  the  act  includes  persons  who 
shall— 

treat  or  attempt  to  treat  any  sick  or  afflicted  person  by  any  system  or 
method  whatsoever  for  reward  or  compensation,  or  to  announce  to  the 
public  in  any  way  a  readiness  to  treat  the  sick  or  afflicted. 

But  Christian  Scientists  are  excepted  by  name. 

In  Louisiana  there  is  this  exemption : 

Nothing  in  this  act,  however,  shall  be  construed  to  prohibit  the  prac- 
tice of  the  religious  tenets  of  any  church  whatsoever. 

In  Maine  Christian  Scientists  and  osteopaths  are  expressly 
exempted  from  the  terms  of  the  act,  together  with — 
any  other  method  of  healing,  if  no  poisonous  or  dangerous  drugs  are 
employed  nor  surgical  operations  performed. 

In  the  State  of  Maryland  the  medical  boards  certainly  have 
full  control,  for  it  is  provided  in  express  terms  that  Christian 
Scientists  are  not  exempted  from  the  terms  of  the  statute. 

In  Michigan  no  exemption  is  made,  and  the  act  is  made  to 
include  all  persons  who — 

attempt  to  diagnose,  cure,  or  relieve  any  human  disease,  ailment,  defect, 
or  complaint,  whether  of  physical  or  mental  origin,  by  attendance  or 
by  advice,  or  by  prescribing  or  furnishing  any  drug,  medicine,  appli- 
ance, manipulation;  or  method,  or  by  any  therapeutic  agent  whatsoever. 

There  is  no  exemption  in  Minnesota,  and  the  defining  clause 
of  the  statute  includes  any — 

agency  for  the  treatment,  care,  or  relief  of  any  wound,  fracture,  or 
bodily  injury,  infirmity,  or  disease. 

In  Mississippi  there  is  no  exemption  and  no  definition  of  the 
meaning  of  the  terms  of  the  act,  in  which  case,  of  course,  Chris- 
41917— 109G9 


15 

tian  Scientists  are  exempted  because  they  are  not  practicing 
medicine. 

In  Missouri  there  is  no  exemption,  and  the  definition  includes — 
*  *  *  any  person  attempting  to  treat  the  sick  or  others  afflicted 
with  bodily  or  mental  infirmities. 

I  shall  come  to  the  State  of  Missouri  a  little  further  along 
and  disclose  to  the  Senate  the  extent  to  which  the  board  of 
health  of  the  city  of  St.  Louis  has  gone  in  attempting  to  sup- 
press the  practice  of  Christian  Science  under  this  statute. 

There  is  no  exemption  in  the  State  of  Montana,  and  the  act 
is  made  to  apply  to  any — 

agency,  whether  material  or  not  material,  for  the  cure,  relief,  or  pal- 
liation of  any  ailment  or  disease  of  the  ruind  or  body,  or  for  the  cure 
or  relict"  of  any  wound,  fracture,  or  bodily  injury  or  other  deformity, 
after  having  received,  or  with  the  intention  of  receiving,  therefor, 
either  directly  or  indirectly,  any  bonus,  gift,  or  compensation. 

In  a  number  of  the  States  the  right  to  practice  Christian 
Science  is  made  to  turn  upon  the  question  of  compensation.  It 
was  conceived  that  a  law  absolutely  forbidding  Christian 
Scientists  to  heal  disease  would  be  unconstitutional,  and  in 
order  to  avoid  that  contingency  it  was  believed  that  they  might 
be  prevented  from  practicing  by  forbidding  them  to  receive  any 
compensation  for  their  services.  In  that  the  legislatures  and 
the  doctors  who  procured  this  kind  of  legislation  have  been 
greatly  mistaken.  Christian  Scientists  do  not  practice  the  heal- 
ing for  money  alone,  and  the  practice  of  healing  by  them  is 
gradually  and  steadily  increasing  in  all  of  the  States  where 
this  unjust  provision  has  been  made  by  law. 

In  Nebraska  the  law  contains  no  exemption,  and  has  this 
provision  defining  the  scope  of  the  act : 

Any  person  shall  be  regarded  as  practicing  medicine  who  shall  op- 
erate or  profess  to  heal  or  prescribe  for  or  otherwise  treat  any  phys- 
ical or  mental  ailment  of  another. 

The  statute  in  the  State  of  Nevada  contains  the  provision 
above  mentioned  in  the  State  of  Montana,  and  almost  in  the 
exact  language. 

In  the  New  Jersey  statute  the  language  is  peculiar.  There 
is  no  exemption  affecting  this  question,  and  this  provision  is 
inserted  in  the  definition  clause : 

The  act  applies  to  all  persons  professing  and  attempting  to  cure 
diseases  by  means  of  the  so-called  systems  of  "  faith  cm-ism,"  "  mind 
healing,"  "  laying  on  of  hands,"  and  other  similar  systems. 

I  do  not  know  whether  or  not  the  distinguished  lawmakers 
of  the  State  of  New  Jersey  understood  that  Christian  Scientists 
would  be  included  in  that  category.  Certainly  they  would  not 
place  themselves  there.  So  far  as  I  know,  the  courts  of  that 
State  have  not  been  called  upon  to  determine  what  is  in- 
cluded in  that  definition. 

In  the  provision  in  the  New  Mexico  statute,  in  defining  the 
words  "  practice  of  medicine,"  the  language  is  precisely  the 
same  as  I  have  stated  for  Montana  and  Nevada.  • 

In  New  York  this  clause  is  inserted  in  the  definition  of  the 
practice  of  medicine  :  Anyone — • 

who  shall  either  offer  or  undertake  by  any  means  or  method  to  diagnose, 
treat,  operate,  or  prescribe  for  any  human  disease,  pain,  injury,  de- 
formity, or  physical  condition. 

North  Carolina  has  no  definition  and  therefore  does  not  affect 
the  rights  of  Christian  Scientists. 
41917— 109G9 


10 

Iii  Oliio  the  defining  clause  is  made  to  include  any  person 
who  administers — 

treatment  of  whatever  nature  for  the  cure  or  relief  of  a  wound,  frac- 
ture, or  bodily  injury,  infirmity,  or  disease — 

for  a  compensation. 

This  clause  in  the  Ohio  statute  has  been  construed  by  the 
courts  to  apply  to  Christian  Scientists,  and  they  are  positively 
forbidden  in  that  State  to  practice  healing  for  a  consideration. 

In  Oklahoma  the  defining  clause  limits  the  operation  of  the 
statute  to  the  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery  in  the  proper 
sense  of  those  terms,  and  therefore  does  not  prohibit  other 
modes  of  healing. 

The  State  of  Oregon  may  be  regarded  as  in  the  same  con- 
dition, except  that  the  language  of  the  defining  clause  of  the 
statute  is  somewhat  ambiguous  and  uncertain. 

In  Pennsylvania,  again,  there  is  no  defining  clause. 

The  statute  of  the  Philippine  Islands  is  made  to  apply  to  any- 
one who  shall  "  treat "  any  person  for  any  ailment. 

In  Porto  Rico  the  language  of  the  statute  is  almost  precisely 
the  same  as  that  of  Montana  and  Nevada. 

The  State  of  Rhode  Island  has  a  reasonable  and  proper  defini- 
tion of  the  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery,  and  does  not  pro- 
hibit other  modes  of  healing. 

The  language  of  the  South  Carolina  statute  is  the  same  as 
that  of  the  Philippine  Islands. 

The  statute  of  Tennessee  is  made  to  apply  to  anyone  who 
"  treats  or  professes  to  treat "  any  person  for  any  physical 
ailment,  the  same  as  in  the  Philippines  and  Porto  Rico. 

The  statute  of  Texas  provides  that  there  shall  be  no  discrimi- 
nation against  any  school  of  medicine  nor  apply  to  masseurs 
practicing  massage  and  provides  in  the  defining  clause  that — 

Any  person  shall  be  regarded  as  practicing  medicine  who  shall 
*  *  *  treat  or  offer  to  treat  any  disease  or  disorder,  mental  or 
physical  deformity,  or  injury  by  any  system  or  method  or  to  effect  cures 
thereof  and  charge  therefor,  directly  or  indirectly,  money  or  other  com- 
pensation. 

This  is  another  of  the  statutes  which  makes  the  right  to  prac- 
tice Christian  Science  depend  upon  the  charging  of  a  compensa- 
tion. 

The  State  of  Utah  has  this  provision  in  the  exempting  clause: 
This  act  does  not  prohibit     *      *     *     those  healing  by  spiritual  means 
without  pretending  to  have  a  knowledge  of  medicine. 

In  Vermont  there  is  no  exemption,  and  the  act  is  made  by  the 
defining  clause  to  apply  to  all  persons  who — 

prescribe,  direct,  recommend,  or  advise,  give  or  sell  for  the  use  of  any 
person  any  drug,  medicine,  or  other  agency  or  application  for  the  treat- 
ment, cure,  or  relief  of  any  bodily  injury,  infirmity,  or  disease,  or  who 
fellows  the  occupation  of  treating  disease  by  any  system  or  method. 

The  defining  clause  in  the  statute  of  Virginia  makes  the  stat- 
ute apply  to  persons  who — 

Cure  or  relieve  those  suffering  from  injury  or  deformity,  or  disease  of 
iiiiiMl  or  body,  or  advertise  or  announce  to  the*public  in  any  manner  a 
readiness  or  ability  to  heal,  cure,  or  relieve  those  who  may  L>e  suffering 
from  injury  or  deformity  or  disease  of  mind  or  body. 

The  exemption  clause  is  as  follows: 

Nothing  in  this  act  shall  he  construed  to  affect  or  to  limit  the  prac- 
tice of  the  religious  tenents  of  any  church   in  the  ministration  of  the 
sick  or  suffering  by  mental  or  spiritual  means  without  the  use  of  any 
drug   or    material    remedy,    whether   gratuitously    or    for    compensation, 
.  provided  sanitary  laws  are  complied  with. 
41017— 100G9 


17 

The  exemption  clause  in  the  statute  of  Washington  includes 
the  following : 

Nor  is  the  act  "  to  discriminate  against  any  particular  school  of  medi- 
cine or  surgery  or  osteopathy,  or  any  system  or  mode  of  treating  the 
sick  or  afflicted,  nor  to  interfere  in  any  way  with  the  practice  of  re- 
ligion." 

The  denning  clause  of  the  statute  of  West  Virginia  confines 
the  effect  of  the  act  to  the  practice  of  medicine,  as  every  such 
act  should  in  justice  be  confined. 

The  statute  of  Wisconsin  is  in  like  condition. 

There  is  no  exemption  in  the  statute  of  the  State  of  Wyoming 
and  the  denning  clause  contains  the  following: 

Any  person  is  regarded  as  practicing  medicine  who  in  any  manner 
holds  himself  out  to  the  public  as  being  engaged  in  the  diagnosis  and 
treatment  of  diseases  or  injuries  or  deformities  of  human  beings,  or 
who  suggests,  recommends,  or  prescribes  any  form  of  treatment  for  the 
intended  palliation,  relief,  or  cure  of  any  physical  or  mental  ailment  of 
any  person,  with  the  intention  of  receiving  therefor,  either  directly  or 
indirectly,  any  fee,  gift,  or  compensation. 

Another  of  the  statutes  turning  upon  the  question  of  charging 
for  services  rendered. 

The  statutes  containing  these  various  peculiar  provisions, 
especially  those  bringing  within  the  terms  of  the  statutes  for 
the  regulation  of  the  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery  all  per- 
sons who  are  healing  disease  by  altogether  different  means  and 
without  the  use  of  medicines  or  surgery,  show  the  extent  to 
which  the  American  Medical  Association  has  gone  in  attempting 
to  hold  in  the  hands  of  its  own  profession  and  school  of  medi- 
cine the  treatment  of  disease,  and  how  obliging  the  legislatures 
of  the  different  States  have  been  in  giving  false  definitions  of 
the  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery  in  aid  of  this  effort  on 
their  part.  If  these  unjust  and,  in  many  cases,  unconstitutional 
statutes  should  be  enforced  Christian  Scientists  would  be  in 
many  of  the  States  absolutely  prohibited  from  any  attempt  to 
heal  disease  or  alleviate  suffering  in  any  form  ;  but,  fortunately, 
the  people  of  this  country  are  more  enlightened,  intelligent,  and 
tolerant  than  the  doctors  or  their  legislators  in  many  cases. 
The  doctors  have  made  the  most  strenuous  efforts  to  enforce 
these  statutes  in  various  States.  Their  efforts  have  usually 
been  failures.  Generally  jurors  will  not  convict  in  such  cases, 
even  if  the  statute  has  been  violated,  as  the  beneficent  work  of 
Christian  Science  has  become  so  well  known  throughout  the 
country,  resulting  in  the  healing  of  thousands  of  people  after 
the  doctors  had  given  them  up  as  incurable,  and  has  convinced 
pretty  much  everybody  except  the  doctors,  whose  selfish  interests 
are  involved,  that  they  are  doing  a  work  which  should  be  com- 
mended by  all  good  citizens  instead  of  making  it  a  criminal 
offense  to  exercise  their  right  of  healing. 

I  am  going  to  trouble  the  Senate  now  for  a  time  by  showing 
just  what  has  been  done  in  some  cases  by  the  medical  practi- 
tioners in  attempting  to  enforce  these  prohibitory  statutes 
which  they  themselves  have  brought  about  for  selfish  purposes 
in  the  prosecution,  even  persecution,  of  those  who  have  con- 
scientiously endeavored  to  heal  disease  and  alleviate  suffering 
by  means  in  which  they  thoroughly  believe  and  which  have 
been  eminently  successful. 

I  can  give  only  a  very  few  of  these  cases,  as  time  will  not 
permit  me  to  go  into  many  of  them.  If  I  could  bring  before 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States  all  of  the  cases  of  persecution 
that  have  grown  up  under  the  prohibitive  statutes  which  I  have- 

41917 — 10969 2 


18 

called  to  its  attention  it  would  arouse  the  just  indignation  of 
every  Member  of  this  body. 

I  now  call  attention  to  one  case  which  is  in  point.  I  have 
called  to  the  attention  of  the  Senate  the  provisions  in  the  stat- 
ute of  the  State  of  Missouri  which  makes  it  a  penal  offense  for 
any  person  to  attempt  to  treat  the  sick  or  those  afflicted  with 
bodily  or  mental  infirmities  unless  they  have  procured  a  license 
to  practice  medicine  or  surgery  from  the  board  of  health,  au- 
thorized by  the  statute  to  issue  such  licenses.  Of  course, 
Christian  Scientists  can  not  procure  a  license  from  a  medical 
board  of  examiners  or  board  of  health,  because  they  are  neither 
medical  practitioners  nor  surgeons.  Therefore,  under  this  stat- 
ute, every  person  who  ministers  to  the  sick  or  injured  without 
such  a  license  is  made  subject  to  a  penalty. 

Bertha  Eeichenbecher  was  a  Christian  Science  practitioner 
and  a  reader  in  one  of  the  churches  in  the  city  of  St.  Louis. 
She  was  urgently  requested  to  attend  a  man  who  falsely 
claimed  to  be  seriously  ill.  She  responded  to  the  call  and  ac- 
cepted a  fee  of  $1  that  was  pressed  upon  her  by  the  alleged 
patient  The  man  was  a  decoy  of  the  health  department  of  the 
city,  who  pretended  to  be  ill  in  order  to  detect  Miss  Reichen- 
becher  in  the  act  of  practicing  Christian  Science  healing.  The 
bill  he  gave  her  was  marked.  Officers  were  waiting  for  her  at 
the  door  and  arrested  her  for  the  alleged  offense  and  took  her 
to  the  police  station  and  treated  her  throughout  with  unneces- 
sary indignities.  But  I  shall  let  Miss  Reichenbecher  give  the 
particulars  of  the  occurrence.  She  has  made  a  succinct  state- 
ment of  the  whole  matter  in  a  sworn  affidavit,  which  is  as 
follows : 

STATE  OB-  Missotnti,  City  of  St.  Louis,  ss: 

Personally  appeared  before  the  undersigned,  a  notary  public  within 
and  for  the  said  city  of  St.  Louis,  Bertha  Reichenbecher,  who,  being 
duly  sworn  on  oath,  deposes  and  says,  viz : 

"  My  name  is  Bertha  Eeichenbecher ;  am  45  years  of  age,  and  un- 
married. I  reside  at  No.  1726  Oregon  Avenue  In  the  said  city  of  St. 
Louis,  where  I  keep  house  with  my  mother,  who  Is  now  91  years  of 
age.  I  have  been  a  member  of  local  Christian  Science  churches  for 
the  past  12  years.  I  am  now  a  member  and  the  second  reador  of 
Third  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  In  St.  Louis,  and  have  been  a  mem- 
ber of  the  First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist,  of  Boston,  Mass.,  since 
1007;  am  also  a  Chiistian  Science  practitioner,  and  have  been  for  two 
years  past. 

"  On  Friday,  December  15,  1911,  a  young  woman,  giving  her  name  as 
Hazel  Miller,  applied  to  me  at  my  home  for  Christian  Science  treat- 
ment, saying  that  she  had  obtained  my  name  from  another  Christian 
Scientist  and  that  she  has  also  heard  me  read  In  the  Christian  Science 
Church.  I  gave  her  a  treatment,  and  she  requested  me  to  call  the 
next  morning  to  see  her  brother,  who,  she  said,  was  confined  to  the 
house  with  Bright's  disease.  She  gave  her  residence  as  No.  2118 
Oregon  Avenue.  There  was  nothing  said  by  either  of  us  about  payment 
for  the  treatment.  The  next  morning  at  11.15  I  called  at  that  ad- 
dress and  found  the  young  man  lying  on  a  couch,  covered,  and  with  a 
bottle  of  medicine  and  a  pipe  on  a  chair  beside  him.  After  a  short 
talk  I  gave  him  treatment  and  arranged  that  he  should  call  at  my  home 
the  following  Monday,  as  he  had  arranged  for  a  week's  treatment.  I 
had  started  for  the  door  when  he  called  me  back  and  insisted  that  his 
'  sister '  pay  me  for  the  treatment.  I  asked  them  to  wait  until  I  was 
through  with  the  case,  but  he  insisted  that  1  accept  payment  then  for 
the  treatment  given.  They  paid  me  $1,  and  I  departed.  Upon  reaching 
the  corner  of  Oregon  and  Russell  Avenue,  a  man  stood  facing  me,  who 
bowed  as  I  approached,  and  said,  'You  are  Miss  Reichenbecher?'  I  re- 
plied, '  Yes,'  and  shook  hands  with  him,  thinking  he  was  some  one  I 
had  met  and  whose  name  I  could  not  recall.  He  said,  'My  name  is 
Coats ;  I  am  an  officer  of  the  law.  and  must  arrest  you  for  practicing 
Christian  Science  without  a  license.'  I  asked  if  he  had  been  watching 
my  house.  He  replied,  '  We  do  not  give  away  our  methods.'  I  then 
41917 — 10969 


•  19 

said  that  I  could  not  understand  why  they  should  entrap  me  in  this 
way,  when  they  might  go  and  find  Christian  Science  practitioners  in 
their  offices  all  over  the  city.  He  made  no  reply.  I  asked  permission 
to  go  to  my  home,  a  little  over  a  block  away,  and  inform  my  mother, 
who  i§  91  years  old,  that  I  would  be  away  for  a  little  while ;  but  he 
would  not  permit  me,  saying  that  I  could  use  both  telephones  when  I 
reached  the  station.  We  then  took  the  Tower  Grove  car  to  the  central 
station,  and  he  reported  to  Acting  Sergt.  Singleton.  I  telephoned  to 
Mr.  John  Ashcroft  that  I  had  been  placed  under  arrest.  It  was  12.30, 
as  near  as  I  can  remember,  when  we  arrived  at  the  station.  I  told 
them  that  my  bondsman  and  attorney  would  be  there  as  quickly  as 
possible.  After  giving  my  name,  etc.,  Officer  Coats,  who  arrested  me, 
escorted  me  to  the  second  floor  and  I  was  turned  over  to  the  matron. 
There  was  some  woman  present  who  had  slept  there  several  nights, 
having  been  under  arrest,  to  whom  the  matron  said  in  sharp,  impatient 
tone,  as  I  entered,  'Turn  your  back.'  She  then  said  to  me  in  the  same 
tone.  'Take  off  your  things.'  I  said,  'Why?  Shall  I  have  to  wait 
long?  I  am  waiting  for  my  bondsman  and  attorney.'  She  said,  'You 
will  probably  be  here  some  little  time.'  She  then  said,  '  Take  off  your 
hat.'  When  I  did  so,  she  took  it  and  untied  the  lining ;  felt  all  over  the 
hat,  inside  and  out ;  and  requested  me  to  take  off  my  coat.  She  emptied 
my  pockets,  and  asked  whether  there  were  only  two  pockets  in  the  coat, 
after  shaking  the  same.  She  then  said,  '  Put  down  your  bag ;  now  take 
off  your  waist."  I  said,  '  Why,  do  you  mean  to  search  me? '  She  replied, 
'  Yes.'  I  grew  red,  I  know,  and  said,  '  Why,  I  am  not  arrested  for 
theft ;  do  you  know  what  I  am  arrested  for  ? '  She  said,  '  Yes ;  we  have 
had  lots  of  your  kind,  and  we  have  to  take  these  measures  to  get  rid 
of  them.'  I  remarked,  '  1  have  been  arrested  for  practicing  Christian 
Science  without  a  license.'  She  said,  '  I  know — drop  your  skirts.'  I 
stood  but  3  or  4  feet  from  a  door  which  contained  a  glass  panel,  across 
which  a  narrow  towel  had  been  stretched,  leaving  some  inches  of  the 
glass  exposed  at  the  top.  I  turned,  and  said,  '  Why,  look ;  I  can  see 
those  men's  heads.'  She  said,  '  That  don't  matter ;  they  can't  see  any- 
thing.' I  reiterated  at  different  times,  '  This  is  awful,  to  be  compelled 
to  be  searched  as  though  I  had  committed  a  theft ' ;  and  I  remarked 
that  Miss  Dyer  had  been  arrested  several  weeks  before,  and  I  asked 
whether  she  had  been  subjected  to  this  ordeal.  She  said  she  did  not 
remember ;  she  supposed  so.  She  requested  me  to  unfasten  my  garters 
and  remove  my  corsets,  which  article  she  carefully  searched,  and  she 
then  told  me  to  take  off  my  shoes  and  turn  down  my  stockings  to  the 
feet.  This  left  me  with  nothing  but  my  undergarments  on,  and  she 
felt  carefully  over  my  entire  body  and  also  through  my  hair.  While 
she  searched  I  could  also  hear  the  voice  of  Mr.  Priesmeyer,  my  bonds- 
man, talking  in  the  next  room. ' 

"  During  our  conversation  I  asked  the  matron  if  she  knew  anything 
about  Christian  Science,  and  she  said  very  little ;  that  one  lady  at  one 
time  gave  her  a  rather  intelligent  answer  to  the  question  as  to  what 
Christian  Science  was ;  and  she  asked  me  what  Christian  Science  was. 
I  said,  '  Prayer,  and  keeping  the  heart  close  to  God.' 

"After  dressing,  she  asked  me  to  count  out  the  money  in  my  purse, 
laying  dollars  together,  and  to  turn  out  everything  that  was  In  it. 
There  was  $12.80  in  the  purse.  My  bag  or  purse  was  then  handed  to 
the  two  men  In  the  next  room  (Coats  and  Lawrence),  and,  as  the  door 
was  opened  a  number  of  times  while  I  was  in  there,  I  saw  them  count- 
ing the  money  and  going  through  the  contents  of  my  bag.  These  men 
put  my  money  in  an  env-elope  and  marked  it  '  11.86.'  I  did  not  know 
until  I  saw  the  statement  in  the  newspaper  two  days  later  that  they 
had  taken  the  marked  dollar  bill,  which  Lawrence  had  given  me,  out 
of  my  purse,  nor  did  I  know  that  the  dollar  was  marked. 

"  While  the  matron  did  not  handle  me  roughly,  she  treated  me  in 
exactly  the  same  manner  she  would  have  exercised  with  any  criminal 
who  was  turned  over  to  her.  While  I  did  not  resist  physically,  I  cer- 
tainly made  strong  protests  against  being  subjected  to  the  search.  I 
treated  her  with  the  courtesy  with  which  I  treat  everyone,  and  when 
I  left  I  said  '  good-day  '  to  her,  as  I  did  not  blame  her  for  the  treat- 
ment I  had  received,  since  she  assured  me  she  was  only  carrying  out 
orders. 

"  Later,  when  I  was  permitted  to  go  into  the  next  room,  there  was 
another  man  who  required  me  to  sign  my  name  in  a  book,  and  he 
escorted  me  to  the  room  downstairs  where  my  bag  had  been  left,  and 
there  it  was  turned  over  to  me. 

"  BERTHA  REICIIENEECHER." 

Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  this  15th  day  of  January,  1912. 
My  commission  expires  May  30,  1914. 

[SEAL.]  OLIVER  FRAZIER, 

Notary  Public,  City  of  St.  Louis,  Mo. 
41917— 109G9 


20 

This  disgraceful  proceeding  aroused  the  Indignation  of  the 
good  people  of  St.  Louis.  The  prosecuting  attorney  denounced 
the  proceeding  as  a  "  frame-up "  and  refused  to  prosecute  the 
case.  The  newspapers,  including  some  medical  journals,  de- 
nounced the  proceedings  in  unmeasured  terms.  One  of  the 
newspapers  of  the  city,  after  giving  a  full  account  of  the  affair 
and  commenting  severely  upon  the  conduct  of  the  board  of 
health,  had  this  further  to  say: 

PHYSICIAN    DENOUNCES    COMMISSIONIHI. 

The  next  step  In  protest  agninst  municipal  and  medical  tyranny  was 
taken  a  few  days  later  when  Dr.  Paul  Fletcher,  a  member  of  the  city 
council  and  a  prominent  doctor,  Introduced  resolutions  In  the  council 
condemning  the  action  of  Dr.  Starkloff  In  gathering  evidence.  The 
council  defeated  the  resolutions.  Dr.  Fletcher  defined  bis  position  as 
follows : 

"  The  health  commissioner  has  caused  employees  to  faint,  and  tha 
methods  are  repugnant  to  many  of  our  esteemed  citizens ;  It  Is  a  travesty 
on  the  law  and  subversive  of  right  and  justice.  It  is  wrong  to  put  a 
woman  In  Jail  who  has  committed  no  crime.  I  am  a  physician,  but  If 
our  law  officers  are  compelled  to  resort  to  such  methods  it  Is  time  to  risa 
np  in  protest. 

The  opposition  of  medical  Journals  to  Christian  Science  was 
clearly  shown,  but  it  is  some  consolation  that  some  of  them  de- 
nounced this  proceeding  and  declared  for  common  decency  in 
the  treatment  of  such  cases.  I  wish  this  might  be  said  of  the 
doctors  who  usually  deal  with  matters  of  this  kind.  They  are 
trying  to  enforce  such  prohibitory  laws  rigorously  and  without 
mercy  with  the  hope  of  suppressing  such  treatment  of  disease 
entirely.  It  is  a  hopeless  task  as  well  as  a  brutal  attempt  to 
deprive  thousands  of  our  people  of  the  right  to  resort  to  the 
remedy  of  their  own  choice  for  relief  from  disease.  If  the 
teachings  of  Christian  Science  are  false,  if  the  principle  of  heal- 
ing its  people  believe  in  is  not  truf  and  their  pretensions  a  fake, 
Christian  Science  will  not  survive.  If  it  is  the  truth  it  will 
prevail,  and  no  restrictive  or  prohibitory  laws  nor  any  amount 
of  persecution  can  overthrow  it  or  force  them  to  forego  their 
right  and  their  religious  duty  to  heal  the  sick.  They  believe, 
and  I  concur  hi  that  belief,  that  any  law  that  forbids  or  inter- 
feres with  this  right  and  duty  is  in  violation  of  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States  and  should  be  treated  accordingly.  I  shall 
come  to  this  question  further  along. 

I  desire  to  take  up  one  or  two  other  cases  of  prosecution  un- 
der the  prohibitory  or  restrictive  State  statutes.  The  following 
newspaper  account  of  conditions  in  New  York  is  interesting : 

ARRESTS    IN    NEW    YORK CASK    AGAINST    MRS.    MOSBACIt    RESULTS    IN    AC- 
QUITTAL  GRAND    JURY    REFUSES    TO     INDICT    ONE     MAN. 

The  status  of  the  "Irregular"  practitioner  In  New  York  City  Is  still 
an  unknown  quantity.  The  latest  case  that  has  come  up  is  that  of 
Mrs.  Margaret  Mosbach,  whose  daughter,  Kathryn,  was  found  by  the 
coroner  to  have  died  on  November  30,  1911,  of  diphtheria,  under  treat- 
ment by  a  Christian  Science  practitioner,  Mrs.  Marie  Roberts,  of  the 
Bronx.  On  January  5  a  coroner's  Jury,  containing  many  of  the  most 
prominent  men  of  the  Bronx,  acquitted  Mrs.  Mosbach  of  willful  neglect 
In  falling  to  call  a  physician  for  her  daughter.  The  verdict  of  the 
Jury  raised  the  question  of  needed  legislation  to  prevent  occurrence  of 
eucb  cases. 

WHY    NOT   ARREST    DOCTORS,    TOO? 

Mr.  Virgil  O.  Stridden,  former  first  reader  of  the  First  Church  of 
Christ,  Scientist,  New  York,  commented  on  the  Mosbach  case  In  a 
lecture.  Mr.  Stricklcr  said  that  the  New  York  World  had  published 
a  list  of  32  children  who  had  died  under  Christian  Science  treatment 
during  the  last  13  years.  The  newspapers  always  publish  such  cases  in 
glaring  headlines,  he  said,  but  the  people's  attention  was  not  called  to 
41917—10909 


21 

oases  proving  fatal  under  regular  physicians.  Against  1,715  deaths  in 
New  York  alone  from  diphtheria  during  1910  of  young  children  under 
care  of  doctors,  only  10  from  that  cause  had  occurred  in  13  years  under 
Christian  Science  treatment  over  the  entire  Nation.  "Really,"  he  con- 
cluded, "  in  all  fairness,  why  should  not  the  doctors  be  arrested  for 
allowing  these  children  to  die  under  their  treatment,  the  same  as  a 
Christian  Science  practitioner  is  arrested  when  one  patient  dies  from, 
the  same  disease  under  her  treatment?  " 

GRAND  JURY  REFUSES   INDICTMENT. 

This  recent  case  recalls  the  arrest  about  a  year  ago  of  Willis  V.  Cole, 
Byron  W.  Winslow,  and  Julius  Benjamin,  Christian  Scientists,  after  the 
machinations  of  a  woman  detective  who  feigned  illness  and  asked  them 
for  treatment  They  were  held  for  the  court  of  special  sessions,  but 
had  the  trials  transferred  to  the  court  of  general  sessions.  This  gave 
the  grand  jury  an  opportunity  to  pass  upon  the  merits  of  the  cases, 
and  the  grand  jury  investigating  Mr.  Winslow's  case  refused  to  indict. 
The  cases  of  Cole  and  Benjamin  are  still  pending,  and  will  probably 
be  made  test  cases  to  decide  the  rights  of  unlicensed  practitioners. 

Mrs.  Mosbach  was  charged  with  neglect  in  trusting  to  Chris- 
tian Science  treatment  in  case  of  her  daughter  who  died  of 
diphtheria  and  not  calling  a  doctor.  It  is  quite  a  common  thing 
to  censure  anyone  who  fails  to  call  a  doctor  where  death  ensues. 
If  a  doctor  is  called  and  the  patient  dies  no  one  is  to  blame.  If 
a  doctor  loses  a  patient  it  is  called  a  misfortune.  The  same 
thing  if  a  Christian  Scientist  is  the  attendant  is  a  crime. 

This  further  account  of  the  New  York  situation  is  from  the 
New  York  World : 

WHY   NOT  ARREST  DOCTORS    WHEN   PATIENTS    DIE?    (VIRGIL  O.    STICKLER) 

THERE      WEKB      1.713      DIPIIT  JIKKIA      DEATHS      IN      CITY      IN      1910 UNDER 

"  SCIENCE  "    TREATMENT    1    IN    13    YEARS — -FIRST    READER    QUOTES    FROM 

VITAL     STATISTICS PROTESTS     AGAINST    ADVOCATES    OF    THE    DRUGGING 

SYSTEM    ATTEMPTING    TO    DICTATE. 

When  the  World  published  two  weeks  ago  a  list  of  32  children  who 
had  died  of  diphtheria  and  other  diseases  during  the  last  13  years 
while  being  treated  by  Christian  Science  practitioners  it  moved  Virgil  O. 
Strickler,  the  first  reader  of  the  First  Church  of  Christ,  Scientist, 
Ninety-sixth  Street  and  Central  Park  West,  to  compile  a  few  statistics 
from  the  vital  records  of  the  city  to  set  against  the  list.  This  is  his 
response  as  he  made  it  when  lecturing  to  the  Sixth  Church  of  Christ, 
Scientist,  in  Lexington  Hall,  No.  158  East  Fifty-eighth  Street,  Tuesday 
night 

Many  people  do  not  understand  why  Christian  Scientists  have  more 
faith  in  Christian  Science  treatment  than  they  have  in  drugs.  The  rea- 
son is  very  plaiu,  said  Mr.  Strickler.  They  get  better  results  under 
Christian  Science  than  they  formerly  obtained  under  the  drugging 
system. 

The  World  published  on  Sunday  the  names  of  32  children  who.  it 
claimed,  had  died  under  Christian  Science  treatment  in  the  United 
States  during  the  past  13  years.  Whenever  a  person,  and  especially  a 
child,  dies  under  Christian  Science  treatment  the  fact  is  published 
under  glaring  headlines  in  the  papers,  and  as  a  rule  somebody  is  ar- 
rested. It  is  safe  therefore  to  assume  that  the  list  published  contained 
the  names  of  all  the  children  who  have  died  under  Christian  Science 
treatment  during  the  last  13  years. 

In  the  published  list  of  names  10  are  said  to  have  died  from  diph- 
theria, 5  from  pneumonia  and  bronchial  pneumonia,  2  from  scarlet 
fever,  and  the  remainder  from  a  variety  of  causes. 

WHAT    NEW    YORK    RECORDS    SHOW. 

I  hold  in  my  hand  an  official  report  of  the  department  of  health  of 
the  city  of  New  York  for  the  year  1910,  which  shows  that  during  the 
last  year  there  were  1,715  deaths  from  diphtheria,  nearly  all  chi'.dren 
under  15  under  the  care  of  doctors  in  this  city  alone,  as  against  10 
deaths  from  the  same  cause  under  Christian  Science  practice  in  the 
<nt ire  United  States  in  13  years.  Of  these  10  cases,  only  1  was  in 
Nen-  York  City. 

The  official  report  also  shows  that  there  were  953  deaths  in  the  city 
hist  year  from  scarlet  fever  tinder  medical  treatment,  marly  all  (|f 
which  were  children,  as  against  2  in  the  entire  United  States  in  l.-J 
years  under  Christian  Science  treatment,  and  not  one  of  those  was  in 
this  city. 

41917 — 109C9 


22 

The  results  in  pneumonia  and  bronchial  pneumonia  are  even  more 
eta  riling.  The  official  report  shows  that  10,519  people  died  in  the 
city  of  New  York  alone  last  year  from  these  diseases  under  medical 
treatment,  more  than  50  per  cent  of  whom  were  children  under  15 
years  of  age,  as  against  5  per  cent  in  the  entire  United  States  under 
Christian  Science  treatment  in  13  years. 

The  report  of  the  board  of  health  also  shows  that  27,111  children 
under  the  age  of  15  jears  died  from  all  causes  under  medical  treatment 
In  the  city  of  New  York  last  year,  as  against  32  who  are  shown  by  the 
published  list  to  have  died  under  Christian  Science  treatment  in  the 
United  States  in  13  years. 

WHY    NOT    AEKEST  DOCTORS? 

These  facts  show  why  Christian  Science  parents  have  more  faith  In 
Christian  Science  than  in  drugs  for  themselves  and  their  families.  If 
any  school  of  medicine  could  guarantee  cures,  it  would  not  be  necessary 
to  arrest  people  in  order  to  compel  them  to  employ  doctors  of  that 
school. 

Why  do  the  newspapers  call  attention  In  a  spectacnlar  way  to  the 
death  of  one  child  In  New  York  City  In  13  years  under  Christian  Science 
treatment  from  diphtheria,  when  more  than  1,500  children  under  the 
age  of  15  years  died  last  year  in  the  city  from  the  same  disease  under 
medical  treatment  without  tUe  newspapers  saying  a  single  word  about 
the  failure  of  the  doctors? 

Really,  in  all  fairness,  why  should  not  the  doctors  be  arrested  for 
allowing  these  1,500  children  to  die_  from  diphtheria  under  their  treat- 
ment, the  same  as  a  Christian  Science  practitioner  is  arrested  when 
one  patient  dies  from  the  same  disease  under  her  treatment?  Or  why 
not  arrest  the  mothers  of  these  1,500  children  for  employing  doctors 
who  allowed  their  children  to  die,  the  same  as  to  arrest  the  mother  of 
the  one  child  who  employed  a  Christian  Science  practitioner? 

Mr.  President,  Christian  Scientists  do  not  claim  to  be  perfect. 
They  do  not  claim  to  heal  In  all  cases.  But  they  do  claim  that 
they  have  a  much  larger  proportion  of  cures  than  the  medical 
practitioners,  and  that,  too,  while  their  patients  are  very  largely 
composed  of  persons  who  are  afflicted  with  so-called  incurable 
diseases,  and  who  have  been  given  up  as  incurable  by  the 
doctors.  They  do  not  believe  there  are  any  incurable  diseases. 
They  have  proved  It  by  healing  thousands  of  diseases  classed  as 
Incurable,  and  which  tbe  doctors  admit  they  can  not  heal,  many 
of  them  being  cases  that  the  doctors  have  actually  given  up  as 
hopeless.  They  do  not  ask  any  favors  of  Congress  or  any 
other  lawmaking  power  to  sustain  their  position  as  healers  of 
disease.  They  are  willing  to  stand  upon  their  merits,  as  shown 
by  their  works.  They  are  willing  to  be  judged  by  their  fruits. 
What  they  do  insist  upon  Is  that  laws  shall  not  be  passed  or 
enforced  that  will  deprive  them  of  the  right  to  heal  disease  or 
put  them  within  the  power  of  the  doctors,  most  of  whom  are 
their  common  enemies,  for  selfish  reasons.  They  are  kept  con- 
stantly on  the  alert  to  meet  the  unwarranted  efforts  of  the 
American  Medical  Association  to  procure  legislation  that  shall 
make  every  act  of  theirs  in  aid  of  the  sick  and  afflicted  a  crime 
and  forbid  them  from  healing  disease.  They  have  not  always 
been  successful.  As  I  have  already  pointed  out,  there  are  m.-my 
legislative  acts  in  the  States  that  have  this  effect,  and  which 
are  wholly  unjust  and  oppressive. 

With  respect  to  the  acts  of  coercion  urged  by  the  doctors,  with 
unjust  laws  as  their  weapons,  the  Business  Farmer,  published  at 
El  Paso,  Tex.,  makes  editorially  this  very  pertinent  comment : 

"  WHERE  ART  THOU  ? 

"And  there  was  war  In  heaven;  Michael  and  his  angels  fought  against 
the  dragon." 

The  whole  world  has  become  a  stupendous  battle  field,  whereon  Is 
being  waged  the  grandest  battle  ever  witnessed  by  mankind.  The  super- 
ficial' observer  reads  about  the  overthrowing  of  the  long-established 
monarchical  Government  of  Portugal,  the  revolution  in  medieval  China, 
41917—10069 


23 

the  barbarous  war  between  Italy  and  Turkey,  the  seething  turmoil  In 
Mexico,  and  the  strike  and  strivings  of  our  country,  and  wonders-— 
what's  next. 

The  close  student  of  the  times,  looking  beneath  the  surfaces,  recog- 
nizes the  great  universal  issue  at  stake.  He  sees  the  battle  of  Arma- 
geddon being  repeated  on  a  world-wide  battle  field.  He  sees  all  the 
seeming  powers  of  evil  marshaled  against  the  oncoming  armies  of  truth. 
He  sees  on  one  hand  the  believers  in  the  universality  of  the  brotherhood 
of  man,  and  on  the  other  the  cohorts  of  special  privileges.  He  sees  the 
desperate  efforts  being  made  by  evil  and  selfishness  and  greed  to  ensnare 
and  enslave  man,  "  made  in  the  image  and  likeness  of  God,"  and  bind 
him  shackled  and  helpless  to  the  chariot  of  Greed's  own  aggrandizement. 

But  universal  man  is  slowly  but  surely  learning  of  his  birthright — is 
learning  to  know  that  he  was  not  made  to  slave  and  toil  and  starve, 
that  bestial  power  might  sit  in  gilded  palaces  and  trample  on  every 
right,  human  and  divine. 

One  of  the  boldest  and  most  audacious  demands  of  the  special-privi- 
lege-seeking  class  that  has  been  witnessed  in  this  country  is  evidenced 
in  the  efforts  being  made  by  the  American  Medical  Association  to  foster 
on  the  people  of  this  country  one  of  the  most  iniquitous  laws  ever  at- 
tempted to  be  fastened  on  a  free  people.  In  order  to  secure  exclusive 
privileges,  and  in  flagrant  violation  of  the  rights  of  other  schools  of 
medicine,  it  seeks  and,  to  accomplish  its  ends,  is  carrying  on  a  most 
heartless,  cruel,  and  diabolical  campaign.  It  seeks  to  inoculate  the  mind 
of  the  people  with  fear  and  terror.  It  is  constantly  sounding  the 
tocsin  of  alarm,  conjuring  up  new  diseases  to  frighten  and  te.'-rorizo  the 
community,  and  then  demanding  added  powers  to  combat  the  product  of 
its  own  excited  imagination. 

The  following  communication  to  the  Ohio  State  Journal  shows 
the  oppressive  measures  to  which  the  doctors  have  resorted  iu 
Ohio: 

ARREST    OF    SCIENCE    HEALERS. 

Two  years  ago  a  timid  maiden  lady  who  happened  to  be  practicing  a 
method  of  healing  which  required  no  medicine  whatever  was  summoned 
before  the  State  medical  board  and  told  in  language  both  uncivil  and 
severe,  if  not  harsh  and  cruel,  that  if  it  ever  heard  of  her  healing  any- 
one by  her  method  it  would  arrest  her,  and  the  frightened  girl  has 
obeyed.  Remember  this  threat  was  against  the  practice  of  medicine 
without  license,  which  she  had  never  thought  of  doing  and  knew  not 
how  to  do. 

-Permit  me  to  cite  another  outrage  from  the  same  official  quarter : 
Late  Friday  night  two  officers  appeared  at  two  residences  on  the  East 
Side  and,  compelling  two  ladies  to  enter  a  patrol  wagon,  hurried  them 
off  to  the  West  Side  on  a  charge  of  trying  to  heal  the  sick  without 
medicine  and  without  the  paid  consent  of  the  medical  board.  The  evi- 
dent design  and  hope  of  the  planners  of  this  latc-at-night  arrest  was 
to  terrify  and  mortify  the  lone  ladies,  who  had  for  months  kept  a 
cancer-afflicted  patient  from  the  surgeon's  knife  and  thus  cheated  him 
out  of  a  case,  if  not  a  fee.  As  it  was,  the  ladies  had  to  wait,  at  the 
station  until  husband,  friend,  and  attorney  came  to  release  them  under 
bond,  thus  defeating  the  design  to  punish  the  ladies  by  a  night  in  jail. 

Now,  the  ends  of  the  law,  if  merciful,  could  have  been  met  in  broad 
daylight,  between  9  a.  m.  and  5  p.  m.,  but  that  would  not  have  served 
the  aim.  Even  if  the  medical  board  is  a  legal  department  of  State, 
some  of  its  officers  are  not  commending  it  to  public  favor,  but,  rather, 
inviting  comparison  with  the  monarchical  methods  of  Europe,  China, 
and  Japan.  (Reform,  Columbus,  Nov.  25.) 

•WHY  THE  AMERICAN  MEDICAL  ASSOCIATION  WANTS  THIS  BILL  PASSED. 

The  American  Medical  Association  is  using  every  effort  to 
maintain  and  increase  its  power.  To  this  end  it  has  spent  years 
of  time  and  thousands  of  dollars  in  the  effort  to  establish  a 
national  medicine  with  one  of  their  schools  of  medicine  at  its 
head.  The  Senate  can  readily  see  by  what  I  have  already 
shown  of  their  efforts  to  enforce  the  existing  laws  how  that 
power  would  be  used  against  every  other  school  and  mode  of 
healing.  They  have  organized  for  the  campaign  in  the  most 
effective  way.  The  association  passed  the  following  resolution, 
offered  by  Dr.  McCormack : 

Rcsolrcd,  That  the  president  be,  and  is  hereby,  authorized  to  appoint 
a  committee  of  seven  members,  which  shall  be  charged  with  the  duty  of 
41917 — 109G9 


24 

framing  a  bill  for  a  national  department  of  health,  to  be  presented  to 
the  next  session  of  Congress  in  December,  and  that  this  committee  shall 
consider  and  determine  all  matters  and  policies  relating  to  national 
health  legislation,  and  may  invite  the  cooperation  and  cooperate  with 
other  organizations  having  the  same  purpose  in  view. 

Prof.  Irving  Fisher,  chairman  of  the  committee  of  one  hun- 
dred, largely  composed  of  allopathic  or  "  regular  "  doctors,  has 
this  to  say  on  the  subject : 

Our  legislative  subcommittee  and  executive  subcommittee  have  held 
frequent  meetings.  We  believe  that  it  is  not  possible  to  overcome  the 
opposition  unless  a  campaign  fund  of  from  $20,000  to  ?25,000  can  be 
raised  at  once.  This  will  be  used  for  printing,  stationery,  telegrams, 
etc.,  the  effect  of  which  will  be  that  Congressmen,  especially  pivotal 
Congressmen,  will  not  dare  to  displease  their  constituents  by  opposing 
President  Taft's  program.  It  will  also  be  used  to  reach  our  American 
Health  League — which  contains  many  thousand  health  enthusiasts — to 
start  up  our  Authors'  League  of  1,000  health  writers,  to  stimulate  our 
press  council  of  100  leading  editors,  and  to  supply  them  and  the  mem- 
bers generally  with  ammunition  in  the  way  of  literature  ;  also  to  reach 
the  labor  organizations  and  the  Grange  and  all  our  allies.  *  *  *  ' 

I  am  writing  to  you  among  the  first,  knowing  that  you  keenly  ap- 
preciate the  importance  of  overcoming  the  selfish  opposition  to  a  proj- 
ect which,  once  started,  will  surely  expand  within  a  decade  so  that  mil- 
lions upon  millions  of  Government  money  will  be  put  into  this  most 
needed  form  of  national  defense. 

Letters  received  from  Congressmen  in  response  to  our  effort  to  poll 
them  on  this  question  show  that  many  of  them,  and  especially  those 
who  control  procedure,  need  something  more  than  the  President's  mes- 
sage to  urge  them  to  action  ;  in  short,  that  they  must  have  letters  and 
telegrams  from  their  constituents. 

Mr.  GALLINGER.     Mr.  President 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER  (Mr.  TOWNSEND  in  the  chair). 
Does  the  Senator  from  California  yield  to  the 'Senator  from 
New  Hampshire? 

Mr.  WORKS.     Certainly. 

Mr.  GALLINGER.  I  presume  the  Senator  from  California 
is  aware  of  the  fact — but  I  think  it  ought  to  go  into  the  REC- 
ORD— that  Prof.  Fisher  is  not  a  physician. 

Mr.  WORKS.     Oh,  yes;  I  am  aware  of  that. 

Mr.  GALLINGER.  He  is  merely  a  professor  of  economics, 
or  something  of  that  kind.  He  took  up  this  propaganda — I  do 
not  know  what  his  purpose  was — and  has  undertaken  to  push 
it  over  the  country.  I  never  approved  of  it,  and  told  him  so 
very  plainly. 

Mr.  WORKS.  I  had  stated  on  another  occasion,  I  will  say 
to  the  Senator  from  New  Hampshire,  that  I  regard  the  efforts 
of  Prof.  Fisher  as  entirely  sincere. 

Mr.  GALLINGER.     Undoubtedly. 

Mr.  WORKS.     But  he  is  not  a  physician. 

The  reference  to  President  Taft's  program  in  this  communica- 
tion was  purely  gratuitous.  The  President  had  no  such  program 
as  they  were  attempting  to  carry  out.  On  the  contrary,  he  was 
opposed  to  the  bill  and  so  informed  its  friends.  He  was  op- 
posed to  creating  a  medical  department  and  they  were  so  in- 
formed. What  he  did  recommend  was  the  bringing  together  of 
the  present  medical  bureaus  under  one  management,  giving  as 
a  reason  that  it  would  be  more  economical  as  well  as  more  effi- 
cient, and  nothing  more.  They  are  accepting  this  bill  in  its 
present  form  because  they  must,  but  with  the  fixed  purpose  of 
adding  to  it  when  they  can  until  they  have  gotten  all  they 
started  out  to  get. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  let  us  see  what  they  are  seeking  to  accom- 

«lish.    There  is  no  limit  to  their  ambition  and  selfish  desires  iu 
his  respect,  as  I  shall  show  by  their  own  declarations. 

41917—10969 


25 

The  following  resolution  of  the  American  Medical  Association, 
adopted  by  its  committee  on  medical  legislation  during  its  ses- 
sion at  the  Holland  House,  in  New  York  City,  in  June,  1903,  will 
tend  to  show  the  extent  to  which  they  are  willing  to  go  and  the 
means  they  will  use  to  accomplish  results : 

Resolved  (4).  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  member  of  the  national 
auxiliary  congressional  and  legislative  committee  to  bring  all  and  only 
such  matters  of  pending  legislation  as  may  be  referred  to  him,  either 
by  the  legislative  committee  of  his  respective  State  or  Territorial 
medical  association,  or  by  the  committee  on  medical  legislation  of  the 
American  Medical  Association,  to  the  attention  of  the  medical  profes- 
sion and  the  people  of  his  respective  county,  and  by  every  honorable 
means,  personal  and  political,  individual  and  professional,  private  and 
public,  direct  and  indirect,  secure  desired  action  thereon  by  his  repre- 
sentatives in  both  branches,  as  the  case  may  be,  of  the  State  legislature, 
or  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States.  And  it  shall  be  his  further 
duty  promptly  to  report  all  such  efforts  on  his  part,  first,  relative  to 
State  legislation,  to  the  chairman  of  the  committee  on  legislation  of 
his  State  medical  association  ;  and,  secondly,  relative  to  national  legis- 
lation, to  the  chairman  of  the  committee  on  medical  legislation  of  the 
American  Medical  Association. 

Resolved,  That  the  chairman  of  committee  on  medical  legislation  of 
the  American  Medical  Association  is  hereby  directed  (a)  to  procure 
from  the  president  of  each  State  and  Territorial  medical  association 
nominations  for  such  national  auxiliary  congressional  and  legislative 
committee,  (b)  to  formulate  a  list  of  the  chief  executive  and  legislative 
officers  of  the  United  States  Government  and  of  the  government  of  each 
State  and  Territory,  (c)  to  collate  necessary  information  relative  to 
the  executive  and  legislative  departments  of  the  American  Medical 
Association  and  of  each  State  and  Territorial  medical  association,  (d) 
to  formulate  a  list  of  the  officers  of  each  State  and  Territorial  board 
of  health  and  medical  licensing  board,  and  (e)  to  secure  a  brief  sum- 
mary of  proposed  legislation,  State  and  national.  And  he  is  further 
directed  to  arrange  the  information  thus  collected  into  a  congressional 
and  legislative  directory  of  the  American  Medical  Association. 

Dr.  Samuel  Dixon,  of  Pennsylvania,  in  a  paper  entitled  "  Law 
the  Foundation  of  State  Medicine,"  published  in  the  journal  of 
the  association,  said: 

Compulsion,  not  persuasion,  is  the  keynote  of  State  medicine.  Let  ft 
be  understood  that  no  matter  how  great  efforts  we  may  make  to 
educate  the  people,  unless  we  have  the  lex  scripta — the  written  law — 
to  fall  back  on,  State  medicine,  while  it  may  be  a  beautiful  science,  can 
never  be  a  practical  art.  *  *  *  The  great  majority  of  mankind 
are  neither  wise  enough  voluntarily  to  submit  themselves  to  the  requireT 
ments  of  sanitary  law  for  the  sake  of  preserving  their  own  health  and 
that  of  their  loved  ones,  or  righteous  enough  to  be  willing  to  exercise 
self-denial  and  repress  the  cravings  of  avarice  to  save  others  from 
sickness,  suffering,  and  death.  *  *  *  But  the  law  we  must  have. 
These  laws  must  reach  into  all  the  relations  of  life.  *  *  * 

Thus  wo  have  a  State  system  of  sanitary  administration,  complete 
and  symmetrical ;  its  head  at  the  seat  of  power  in  the  State,  untrcam- 
meled  in  the  exercise  of  authority,  reaching  down  through  the  subdivi- 
sions of  county  and  township  to  the  people,  and  a  department  in  daily 
touch  with  every  nook  and  corner  of  the  State  through  its  faithful 
allies,  the  physicians  of  the  Commonwealth. 

The  following  from  an  article  by  Henry  R.  Strong,  of  St. 
Louis,  shows  fairly  well  the  workings  of  the  American  Medical 
Association : 

THE   ATTEMPT  OF  THE   AMERICAN    MEDICAL   ASSOCIATION   TO   ENLIST    LEGIS- 
LATIVE AID   IN   FAVOR  OF   ITS    MONOPOLISTIC   SCHEMES. 

Finally,  in  the  last  few  years,  the  association,  following  the  example 
of  other  corporations  ic  the  gradual  forging  of  its  monopolistic  bonds, 
has  essayed  to  influence  the  legislative  and  administrative  branches  at 
State  and  National  Government  In  favor  of  its  schemes,  and  has  re- 
cently gone  openly  into  politics  for  that  purpose.  To  be  sure,  It  still 
shouts  Its  old-time  slogan  of  "  the  public  weal,"  but  in  this  case  it 
makes  the  thinnest  kind  of  disguise  of  its  real  motives  and  openly 
boasls  that  it  has  already  made  the  power  of  medicine  felt  in  legisla- 
tive halls,  so  that  whereas  legislators  formerly  kept  the  representatives 
of  the  association  dancing  attendance  upon  them  for  anything  they 
41917 — 10969 


26 

wanted  now  these  same  legislators  dance  attendance  upon  the  associa- 
tion's delegates. 

Said  Dr.  C.  A.  L.  Reed,  chairman  of  the  legislative  committee  and 
late  candidate  for  the  United  Stntes  Senate,  in  a  speech  at  Chicago 
during  the  recent  meeting  of  the  association  : 

"  When  a  committee  of  the  American  Medical  Association  went  to 
the  Fifty-eighth  Congress,  their  legislative  committee  said,  'Can't  yoji 
boil  down  what  you  have  to  say  into  20  minutes  ? '  Dr.  Reed  said, 
*  There  were  in  that  Congress  one  doctor  in  the  Senate  and  none  in  the 
House.'  *  *  * 

"  In  the  Sixtieth  Congress  there  were  five  doctors,  all  told,  and  he- 
cause  of  the  same  influence  we  simply  went  to  the  Willard  Hotel  and 
sent  for  Congressmen  to  come  to  us,  and  they  came.  *  *  »  In 
the  next  Congress  I  have  every  reason  to  helieve  there  will  be  25 
physicians." 

According   to    Dr.    Reed,    It   is    only    by    representation    jn    Congress, 
which   he  described   as   being  at  present   '  water-logged   with    lawyers,' 
that  the  association  could  hope  to  see  its  will  translated  into  law. 
******* 

Like  every  powerful  corporation,  the  American  Medical  Association 
has  a  legislative  fund.  Probably  like  every  other  corporation  it  has 
really  two  legislative  f ur.ds.  one  open  to  public  scrutiny  and  the  other 
known  onlv  to  the  powers  that  be.  The  Journal  of  the  American  Med- 
ical Association  of  May  23,  1908,  tells  of  annual  expenses  for  "  med- 
ical legislation"  (whatever  that  may  mean)  of  $2,573.22.  It  can  hardly 
be.  however,  that  this  represents  all  the  money  spent  in  furthering  its 
legislative  and  political  schemes,  for  the  committee  on  legislation,  of 
which  Dr.  C.  A.  L.  Reed  was  chairman,  in  its  report  to  the  convention 
in  1905  stated : 

"  It  has  secured  a  list  of  local  political  leaders  of  every  organized 
and  recognized  political  party  in  the  United  States.  The  list  already 
embraces  the  names  of  several  political  managers  in  each  of  900  coun- 
ties, the  entire  list  aggregating  in  excess  of  11,000  names.  Through 
this  list  the  central  committee  is  in  position  to  bring  questions  of  pend- 
ing legislation  to  the  serious  and  thoughtful  consideration  of  the  men 
who.  in  their  respective  localities,  exercise  a  preponderating  influence 
in  determining  political  action.  *  *  *  The  political  list  is  arranged 
so  that  the  dominant  politics  of  each  county  and  of  each  congressional 
district  is  indicated,  as  well  as  the  political  affiliations  of  each  member 
whose  name  appears  on  the  list.  It  thus  happens  that  we  are  able  to 
move  with  a  certain  degree  of  accuracy  in  invoking  political  influence 
in  behalf  of  such  measures  as  are'taken  up  by  your  committee.  This 
list  will  be  kept  alive  by  asking  for  revisions  from  time  to  time,  espcr 
dally  after  each  general  election,  and  will,  we  are  sure,  prove  to  be  an 
effective  medium  of  action  in  the  agitations  which  are  pending  in  the 
immediate  future." 

In  June.  1907,  It  was  announced  by  Dr.  Reed  that  the  association 
had  an  emissary  in  each  of  the  2,830  counties  of  the  country,  and  that 
the  list  of  political  leaders  had  been  increased  to  16,000.  to  whom  cir- 
culars are  sent,  the  purpose  being,  according  to  Dr.  Reed,  "  to  educate 
them  on  proposed  or  pending  legislation  in  which  the  medical  profes- 
sion Is  interested."  All  of  which  shows  that  the  American  Medical 
Association  leaders  have  not  been  idle  and  that  they  are  not  novices  in 
politics. 

If  this  kind  of  work  Is  being  kept  up,  it  must  certainly  require  more 
than  the  paltry  sum  specified  in  the  Journal's  report  to  sustain  it. 

Mr.  President,  the  doctors  in  all  their  efforts  to  procure  re- 
strictive or  prohibitive  legislation  of  this  kind,  proceed  upon  the 
theory  that  they  and  they  alone  are  competent  to  deal  with 
questions  of  health,  and  that  all  other  people  claiming  to  heal 
disease  are  incompetents.  Thus  it  is  said  by  Dr.  Henry  O. 
Marcy,  former  president  of  the  American  Medical  Association, 
in  speaking  of  the  opposition  to  this  bill : 

It  is  the  old  cry  of  the  incompetents  who  practice  under  various 
designations  against  legislation  that  will  tend  to  bar  them  from  prac- 
tice and  keep  the  practice  in  the  hands  of  those  who  will  not  be  a 
menace  to  the  public  health. 

This   is  a   very   significant   utterance.     It  assumes   that  all 

knowledge  in   health   preservation   and   healing  is  in   the  old 

school  practitioners,  and  that  the  purpose  of  this  legislation  is 

intended  to  bar  everyone  else.     Here  is  another  declaration  of 

41917—10969 


27 

/ 

a  like  kind.    Dr.  C.  A.  L.  Reed,  chairman  of  the  legislative  com- 
mittee of  the  American  Medical  Association,  has  this  to  say : 

The  principle  that  is  involved  is  the  same — that  the  man  in  posses- 
sion of  the  technical  knowledge  which  gives  him  a  scientific  compre- 
hension of  his  subject  and  his  problem  should  have  the  executive  au- 
thority to  enforce  that  knowledge  and  not  be  overridden  by  a  man  who 
has  n'o  such  technical  knowledge,  and  consequently  no  such  compre- 
hension of  the  importance  of  the  subject. 

And  Prof.  J.  Pease  Norton,  of  Yale  University,  in  a  speech 
before  the  American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science, 
reprinted  with  approval  in  the  journal  of  the  American  Medical 
Association,  pointed  out  the  extent  to  which  the  advocates  of 
this  kind  of  legislation  proposed  to  go  if  Congress  should  permit 
it.  He  says: 

1.  It  seems  desirable  that  a  United   States  national  department  of 
health  should  be  established,  having  as  its  head  a  secretary,  who  shall 
be  a  member  of  the  Executive  Cabinet. 

2.  The  purpose  of  the  department  should  be  to  take  all  measures  cal- 
culated,   in   the   judgment   of   experts,    to   decrease   deaths,    to   decrease 
sickness,  and  to  increase  physical  and  mental  efficiency  of  citizens. 

3.  It  should  consist  of  the  following  bureaus : 
National  bureau   of  infant  hygiene. 
National  bureau  of  education  and  schools. 
National  bureau  of  sanitation. 

National   bureau   of  pure  food. 

National  bureau  of  registration  of  physicians  and  surgeons. 

National  bureau  of  registration  of  drugs,  druggists,  and  drug  manu- 
facturers. 

National  bureau  of  registration  of  Institutions  of  public  and  private 
relief,  correction,  detention,  and  residence. 

National  bureau  of  organic  diseases. 

National  bureau  of  quarantine. 

National  bureau  of  health  information. 

National  bureau  of  immigration. 

National  bureau  of  labor  conditions. 

National  bureau  of  research,  requiring  statistics. 

National  bureau  of  research,  requiring  laboratories  and  equipment. 

This  is  a  pretty  broad  field  that  the  National  Government  is 
expected  to  enter  upon.  It  is  almost  without  limit. 

And  when  a  measure  similar  to  this  was  before  Congress  on  a 
hearing  before  a  Senate  committee,  Dr.  Welch,  formerly  presi- 
dent of  the  same  association,  threw  out  this  significant  remark 
to  the  Senator  from  Utah  [Mr.  SHOOT]  : 

I  would  simply  like  to  throw  out  the  suggestion  that  It  may  be  that 
the  Federal  Government  can  exercise  larger  powers  in  this  matter  than 
Is  generally  supposed  to  be  the  case. 

These  declarations  show  authoritatively  and  clearly  what 
these  gentlemen  have  in  view  as  the  final  result  of  legislation 
of  this  character  and  the  use  they  expect  to  make  of  it.  It  is 
an  imposing  and  far-reaching  scheme  to  bring  the  entire  health 
activities  under  the  control  of  this  one  school  of  medicine  and 
by  the  power  thus  given  them  to  influence  and  control  indirectly, 
if  not  directly,  the  health  activities  of  the  several  States.  But 
one  of  the  most  radical  declarations  upon  this  important  subject 
will  be  found  in  the  magazine,  Clinical  Medicine,  in  the  issue  of 
April,  1911,  as  follows: 

The  inhabitants  of  each  community  should  be  equally  divided  among 
the  physicians,  and  these  should  have  no  expectation  of  poaching  on  their 
neighbors'  preserves.  If  any  increase  in  pay  resulted  from  such  acts 
they  would  soon  cease.  The  proportion  would  be  more  equally  approxi- 
mated, and  every  member  of  the  profession  would  have  enough. 

It  is  a  grave  menace  to  the  liberties  of  the  people  in  a  matter 
of  life  and  death.    I  wonder  how  far  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States  is  willing  to  be  made  a  party  to  such  a  scheme. 
41917—10969 


2.8 

Mr.  President,  I  have  shown  by  the  declaration  of  eminent 
physicians,  either  now  or  heretofore  connected  with  the  Amer- 
ican Medical  Association,  what  their  purposes  and  intentions  are 
in  seeking  this  legislation,  and  what  the  people  of  this  country 
may  expect  if  the  powers  of  the  Government  are  thus  given  over 
to  them.  I  want  now  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Senate  to  what 
some  other  equally  distinguished  gentlemen  have  said  as  to  the 
purpose  and  effect  of  legislation  of  this  kind.  In  an  address  de- 
livered by  Dr.  G.  Frank  Lydston,  of  the  medical  department  of 
the  State  University  of  Illinois,  in  speaking  of  the  efforts  of 
the  doctors  to  procure  such  legislation  as  I  have  been  calling 
attention  to,  he  says: 

Despotism  in  medicine  is  not  a  theory,  it  is  a  condition,  one  that 
should  alarm  all  save  its^  direct  beneficiaries.  No  physician  can,  with 
equanimity,  survey  the  trend  of  affairs  medical  in  America  unless  he 
has  no  interest  in  personal  liberty.  He  has  forgotten  the  high  ideals 
of  our  medical  forefathers.  The  more  speciously  masked  self-interest  is 
the  more  dangerous  it  becomes. 

And  this  extract  from  the  Pacific  Coast  Journal  of  Homeop- 
athy: 

No  citizen  objects  to  Government  supervision  looking  to  sanitation, 
pure  water,  air,  and  food  but  what  he  finds  next  is  in  the  invasion 
of  the  right  and  duty  of  a  family  physician  and  .of  his  own  personal 
liberty  by  health-board  doctors.  In  short,  he  objects  to  health  boards. 
He  also  objects  to  doctors,  and  if  in  private  practice  he  would  not  call 
in  one  to  invade  his  home,  dictating  medication  to  him,  and  imprison- 
ing him  if  he  refuses  to  submit.  They  say  the  national  department 
would  not  do  this.  Well,  the  city  and  State  departments  are  supposed 
not  to  do  it,  but  they  do  it  with  an  iron  hand.  The  citizens  do  not 
want  political  doctors  bossing  therapeutics. 

I  call  attention  also  to  a  word  said  by  Herbert  Spencer  on 
this  subject  that  is  interesting  and  instructive: 

Moved  as  are  the  projectors  of  a  railway,  who,  whilst  secretly  hoping 
for  salaries,  persuade  themselves  and  others  that  the  proposed  railway 
will  be  beneficial  to  the  public — moved,  as  all  men  are  under  such  cir- 
cumstances, by  nine  parts  of  self-interest  gilt  over  with  one  part  of 
philanthropy — surgeons  and  physicians  are  vigorously  striving  to  erect 
a  medical  establishment  akin  to  our  religious  one.  Little  do  the  public 
at  large  know  how  actively  professional  publications  are  agitating  for 
State  appointive  overseers  of  the  public  health.  There  is  an  unmis- 
takable wish  to  establish  and  organize  a  tax  supported  class  charged 
with  the  health  of  men's  bodies  as  the  clergy  are  charged  with  the 
health  of  their  souls.  And  whoever  has  watched  how  institutions 
grow,  how  little  by  little  a  very  innocent-looking  infancy  unfolds  into 
a  formidable  maturity,  with  vested  interests,  political  influence,  and  a 
strong  instinct  of  self-preservation,  will  see  that  the  germs  here 
peeping  forth  are  quite  capable  under  favorable  circumstances  of  de- 
veloping into  such  an  organization. 

These  are  only  samples  of  numerous  declarations  on  this 
subject.  Others  might  be  cited,  but  time  will  not  permit.  The 
ones  given  are  amply  sufficient  to  show  what  is  ahead  of  us  in 
the  strenuous  and  remarkable  effort  of  an  interested  class  to 
procure  legislation  that  will  immeasurably  increase  their  power 
at  the  expense  of  the  liberty  of  the  whole  people. 

Mr.  President,  it  is  not  only  what  they  want  that  should  lead 
us  to  consider  their  demands  with  the  greatest  caution.  The 
means  by  which  they  propose  to  procure  what  they  want  is 
more  reprehensible,  and  should  condemn  their  whole  effort  as 
unreasonable,  unjust,  and  tyrannical.  They  propose  to  enter 
into  politics  in  its  worst  and  most  disgraceful  form  to  force 
from  Congress  and  State  legislatures  the  laws  they  want. 
This  is  clearly  shown  by  their  own  declarations  and  official 
acts.  They  show  something  more  than  this.  It  appears  from 
41917— 109C9 


29 

the  declarations  to  which  I  am  about  to  call  attention  that 
their  claim  that  they  are  working  unselfishly  and  in  the  interest 
of  humanity  is  a  mere  pretense.  They  are  working  in  the 
interest  of  themselves  and  no  one  else.  Let  me  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  Senate  to  a  few  of  the  many  expressions  of  this 
kind,  showing  conclusively  the  selfish  motive  behind  this  move- 
ment The  South  Carolina  Medical  Journal  states: 

We  all  know  (or  ought  to  know  if  we  are  old  enough  to  practice 
medicine)  that  legislation  is  not  accomplished  In  the  effulgent  sun- 
light of  a  noisy  public,  not  on  the  hustings  of  a  demagogic  campaign 
meeting,  nor  even  (where  one  might  suppose)  on  the  oratorical  forum 
of  the  House  of  Representatives. 

It  is  conceived,  laid,  and  hatched  in  political  byways  and  hedges; 
around  the  corner  on  the  dead  quiet,  with  soft  words  and  apt  reason- 
ing. 

The  president  of  the  North  Dakota  State  Medical  Association, 
addressing  the  association,  says: 

We  are  better  equipped  to  pass  sane  and  Important  legislation  than 
any  other  body  of  men  and  to  make  ourselves  felt  in  public  matters, 
owing  to  our  Intimate  relations,  as  family  physicians  and  advisers, 
•with  the  voters  throughout  the  State. 

Dr.  Cornelius  Williams,  president  of  the  Minnesota  State 
Medical  Association,  in  his  presidential  address  at  the  forty- 
first  annual  meeting,  October,  1909,  as  reported  in  the  Journal 
of  the  American  Medical  Association  November  20,  1909,  said: 

I  declare  that  It  is  only  by  a  participation  In  politics  that  the 
physician  may  accomplish  his  whole  mission,  .and  that  such  partici- 
pation is  one  of  his  highest  duties.  From  the  very  nature  of  his 
position  his  duties  place  him  in  the  r61e  of  police ;  he  must  suppress 
or  regulate  whatever  is  Injurious  to  the  peace,  health,  morality,  gen- 
eral intelligence,  and  thrift  of  the  community  and  its  internal  safety. 
Isolated  in  the  sense  that  there  is  no  concert  of  action,  the  medical 
man  is  a  negligible  quantity,  as  to  any  influence,  either  for  good  or 
bad  legislation  ;  but  united  into  a  guild  of  workers,  the  medical  body 
would  be  a  great  power  to  determine  the  outcome  of  an  election  and 
to  direct  the  measures  of  government. 

Dr.  Charles  J.  Whalen  in  the  Illinois  Medical  Journal  last 
September  stated,  among  other  things: 

Medicine  as  a  means  of  livelihood  has  arrived  at  the  most  critical 
period  of  Its  history.  The  economic  status  and  outlook  for  the  profes- 
sion is  pitiable.  A  feeling  exists  among  a  large  number  of  the  pro- 
fession that  medicine  should  be  represented  more  numerously  than  it  is 
in  the  legislatures. 

"We  should  have  at  least  as  many  physicians  as  lawyers  in 
Congress,"  says  a  recent  correspondent  in  the  Lancet-Clinic. 

In  its  report  two  years  ago  the  public-relations  committee  of 
the  Chicago  Medical  Society  said : 

The  medical  profession  will  never  get  what  ft  Is  entitled  to  In  the 
way  of  legislation  until  it  wakes  up  and  becomes  a  factor  to  be  reck- 
oned with  politically.  This  can  best  be  done  by  bringing  the  lawmakers 
to  a  realization  of  the  tremendous  influence  of  organized  medicine  and 
the  votes  they  will  lose  if  they  do  not  give  the  profession  respectful  con- 
sideration. 

As  an  organization  we  should  not  only  ask  for  what  we  want  but 
should  be  in  a  position  to  demand  it  if  necessary. 

In  medicine,  as  in  other  forms  of  business,  unification  for  mutual  pro- 
tection must  be  brought  about.  In  organization  lies  our  only  hope. 

From  the  Lancet-Clinic,  of  Cincinnati,  for  February  18,  1911, 
under  the  title  "Organization  gone  ruad,"  I  take  this: 

The  American  Medical  Association  is  perhaps  the  best  illustration  of 
the  effect  of  the  organization  furore.  It  has  become  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  a  huge  oligarchy.  Its  policies  are  directed  by  a  few,  who, 
ostensibly  acting  as  the  agents  of  the  members,  in  reality  take  the 
initiative  in  every  movement,  assisted  thereto  bv  the  constitution  of 
the  society  itself.  The  spirit  of  democracy  is  as  foreign  to  it  as  it  is  in 
41917— 109G9 


30 

the  realm  of  the  Czar  of  all  the  Russias.  It  is  the  natural  result  of  the 
modern  trend  of  concentration,  subordinating  private  judgment  to  the 
leaders'  dictum. 

We  see  the  same  result  in  the  various  State  organizations.  As  in  the 
national  association,  so  in  the  State  societies,  the  thoughts  of  the  mem- 
bers are  cribbed,  cabined,  and  confined.  If  anyone  so  far  forgets  him- 
self as  to  dissent  from  the  established  order,  he  is  made  to  feel  the 
sting  of  disapproval,  until  he  is  glad  to  hide  himself  and  his  views  from 
the  gaze  of  his  associates. 

The  machine  Is  well  oiled  and  the  steam  roller  runs  smoothly.  Mem- 
bers are  extremely  careful  to  avoid  being  run  over.  Hence,  whatever  is, 
is  right. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  State  Medical  Association  of  Wisconsin 
held  in  June,  1911,  and  reported  in  the  Wisconsin  Medical 
Journal  for  the  same  month,  Dr.  A.  R.  Craig,  assistant  to  the 
secretary  of  the  American  Medical  Association,  described  the 
evolution  of  that  body  as  follows: 

The  whole  subject  of  the  work  of  the  organization  has  been  to  me  a 
wonderfully  interesting  thing.  In  studying  this  subject  I  have  been 
interested  to  find  how  few  men  really  had  a  suspicion  of  what  the 
possibilities  »of  a  real  organization  were.  If  you  read  the  history  of 
the  American  Medical  Association,  you  will  find  that  in  the  old  days  a 
delightful  lot  of  gentlemen  would  meet  together  and  promulgate  and 
expound  and  resolve  and  adjourn ;  and  in  another  year  they  would  come 
together  once  more  in  a  new  field  and  again  orate  and  expound  and 
resolve  and  adjourn.  So  the  American  Medical  Association  went  on 
for  some  40  or  50  years  of  its  growth.  True,  it  was  gathering  new 
forms  and  new  impetus  and  was  doing  something,  but  you  could  prac- 
tically see  nothing  of  the  work  that  was  accomplished  except  a  pleasant 
time  was  had  at  each  annual  session.  Then  came  that  wonderful  epoch 
in  the  association's  life  when  things  began  to  happen  after  a  year  or 
two,  and  the  American  Medical  Association  met  once  a  year,  hut  lived 
through  the  year.  To-day,  if  you  were  to  go  to  Chicago  you  would  find 
on  the  corner  of  Dearborn  and  Indiana  Avenue  a  7-story  structure 
with  some  150  employees,  your  employees,  working  every  day  in  the 
year  to  accomplish  your  ends  under  your  delegated  direction,  to  accom- 
plish the  purposes  and  ends  of  that  organization.  I  would  like  to  say 
that  this  organization  will  be  completed  and  will  be  really  effective 
when  each  State  in  its  turn  is  organized  in  such  a  way  that  you  do 
not  meet  for  a  week's  session  or  a  three  or  four  days'  session,  but  you 
meet  as  a  board  of  bank  directors  might  meet,  to  determine  the  policy 
of  the  machine  which  is  to  be  effective  throughout  the  year. 

These  various  quotations  show  that  it  is  not  the  public  that 
Is  demanding  this  legislation,  but  a  political  machine,  an  oli- 
garchy of  a  few  doctors  in  control  of  the  American  Medical  Asso- 
ciation, and  who  have  so  far  become  intoxicated  with  their 
success  as  to  forget  discretion.  As  an  illustration,  let  me  quote 
to  you  the  statement  of  Dr.  Charles  A.  L.  Reed  in  a  speech  de- 
livered at  Chicago  and  widely  quoted  in  medical  journals : 

When  a  committee  of  the  American  Medical  Association  went  to  the 
Fifty-eighth  Congress,  their  legislative  committee  said,  "  Can't  you  boll 
down  what  you  have  to  say  into  20  minutes?"  There  were  in  that 
Congress  one  doctor  in  the  Senate  and  none  in  the  House. 

In  the  Fifty-ninth  Congress  there  wore  three  doctors  in  the  House 
and  one  in  the  Senate.  The  doctors  all  over  the  country  had  been 
using  their  influence,  so  the  committee  said,  "  Just  tell  us  what  you 
want,  gentlemen  ;  take  as  much  time  as  you  like." 

In  the  Sixtieth  Congress  there  were  five  doctors,  all  told,  and  be- 
cause of  the  same  influence  we  simply  went  to  the  Willard  Hotel  and 
sent  for  Congressmen  to  come  to  us,  and  they  came.  *  *  *  In  the 
next  Congress  I  have  every  reason  to  believe  there  will  be  25  physicians. 

WHY   SHOULD  CONGRESS   INTRUST  THEM    WITH  THIS    GREAT   POWER? 

Mr.  President,  there  is  no  complaint  now  of  the  inefficiency 
or  lack  of  power  or  authority  on  the  part  of  the  various  health 
bureaus  now  in  existence  and  supported  by  the  National  Gov- 
ernment. The  Public  Health  and  National  Quarantine  Bumui 
is  given  ample  and  sufficient  power  to  deal  with  all  such  ques- 
tions. No  new  legislation  on  the  subject  is  necessary.  Even  the 
41917—10969 


31 

bringing  together  of  these  various  bureaus  whose  province  It 
is  to  deal  with  public-health  questions,  attached  as  they  are 
to  different  departments  of  the  Government  and  performing 
different  and  varied  functions  affecting  the  departments  to 
which  they  respectively  belong,  not  only  will  not  strengthen 
them  but  will  result  in  confusion,  conflicts  of  authority,  and 
weakness. 

But,  Mr.  President,  I  desire  to  go  a  little  deeper  than  this 
into  the  wisdom  and  propriety  of  vesting  in  one  school  of 
medicine  such  unlimited  power  over  the  health,  even  the  lives 
of  the  people  of  the  country.  What  claims  to  superior  knowl- 
edge and  understanding  have  the  old  school  or  "  regulars  "  in 
medicine  that  should  induce  Congress  to  give  over  to  them  this 
vast  power  over  the  public  health? 

I  have  no  animosities  against  the  doctors,  Individually  or  as 
a  class.  They  have  their  work  to  do  in  the  interest  of  man- 
kind, and  should  be  fully  protected  in  their  right  to  pursue 
that  work.  It  is  needed  in  the  interest  of  mankind,  because 
the  great  majority  of  the  people  still  believe  in  the  medical 
doctor  and  his  drugs.  So  long  as  this  is  the  case  the  physician 
of  whatever  school  should  be  fully  and  amply  protected  in  his 
right  to  administer  what  his  patients  believe  hi  and  want. 
This  must  be  so  in  a  free  country  like  ours  so  long  as  there  is 
a  single  individual  who  believes  in  and  wants  the  services  of 
a  medical  doctor.  That  is  what  I  call  medical  freedom.  On 
the  other  hand,  they  who  do  not  believe  in  the  efficacy  of  drugs 
or  in  the  services  of  a  medical  practitioner,  but  who  do  believe 
in  another  and  different  remedy,  should  be  accorded  the  same 
right,  and  that  right  should  be  jealously  protected.  That,  too. 
Is  medical  freedom.  No  one  class  of  men  who  believe  in  one 
mode  of  healing  as  against  all  others  have  a  right  to  force  that 
method  upon  others  who  do  not  believe  in  it.  That  is  tyranny 
and  a  violation  of  the  liberties  of  the  people. 

Mr.  President,  I  have  no  objection  even  to  the  American  Med- 
ical Association,  so  long  as  it  confines  its  efforts  to  the  advance- 
ment of  science  as  it  sees  it  or  for  the  elevation  of  the  standard 
of  the  physicians  of  its  school  of  medicine,  or  the  advancement 
in  any  way  of  members  of  its  own  profession.  I  do  not  com- 
plain even  of  Its  attempt  to  benefit  its  own  members  by  legis- 
lation. But  I  do  object  most  seriously  to  the  intolerant,  tyran- 
nical, and  oppressive  efforts  it  has  been  making  for  years  to 
prevent  other  schools  of  medicine  or  the  practitioners  of  other 
modes  of  healing  from  exercising  their  right  to  heal  the  sick. 
Its  course  in  this  respect  has  been  un-American.  It  is  an 
offense  to  free  government.  Its  pretensions  of  superior  knowl- 
edge on  these  great  and  vital  subjects  are  unwarranted.  I  have 
already  shown  by  the  declaration  of  one  of  their  own  members 
that  the  "  basis  of  the  entire  profession  of  medicine  is  faith  in 
the  doctor  and  his  drugs  and  his  methods." 

If  this  be  so,  and  it  is  abundantly  supported  by  experience 
and  competent  authority,  it  would  seem  that  the  one  important 
thing,  the  just  thing  for  them  to  do,  is  to  prove  themselves  and 
their  modes  of  healing  worthy  of  this  faith.  This  must  be  done 
by  their  works.  It  can  not  be  done  by  assailing  and  persecuting 
those  who  have  lost  faith  in  them  and  their  drugs  and  trans- 
ferred it.  to  others. 
41917 — 109G9 


32 

Everyone  who  thinks  knows  that  the  practice  of  medicine  is 
not  a  science.  Remedies  are  adopted  to-day  and  abandoned  as 
worthless  to-morrow.  The  medical  practitioner  of  50  years  ago 
is  looked  upon  by  members  of  his  own  profession  of  to-day  as 
an  ignoramus,  and  the  remedies  he  used  then  are  regarded  as 
wholly  worthless  and  even  as  destroyers  of  health.  Fifty  years 
from  now,  I  predict,  the  men  of  to-day  who  administer  drugs 
as  a  means  of  healing  will  be  looked  back  upon  as  enemies  to 
health. 

But,  Mr.  President,  I  am  not  going  to  leave  this  position  of 
mine  as  to  the  unreliability  of  medical  treatment  of  sickness 
and  disease  to  rest  upon  my  own  opinion  of  it,  although  I  speak 
from  abundant  and  painful  experience.  I  am  going  to  call  as 
witnesses  of  the  truth  of  what  I  say  men  of  superior  knowl- 
edge and  experience.  The  first  is  the  late  Prof.  William  James, 
world-famed  professor  of  psychology  of  Harvard  University. 
In  an  address  delivered  at' the  second  hearing  before  the  com- 
mittee on  public  health  of  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  at 
Boston,  March  2,  1898,  opposing  proposed  legislation  which 
would  exclude  all  but  medical  practitioners  from  exercising 
their  right  to  heal  the  sick,  the  professor  had  this  to  say : 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  rise  to  protest  this  bill.  I  come  to  represent  no 
body  of-  persons  with  special  Interests,  but  simply  as  a  private  citizen 
interested  in  Rood  laws  and  In  the  growth  of  medical  knowledge.  The 
medical  profession  are  urging  the  bill  in  the  interests,  as  they  believe, 
of  true  science.  Those  who  oppose  it,  they  think,  can  do  so  only  in  the 
interests  of  ignorance  and  quackery.  I  hold  a  medical  degree  from 
Harvard  University.  I  belonged  for  many  years  to  the  most  scientific 
of  our  medical  societies.  I  have  taught  anatomy  and  physiology,  and 
now  teach  mental  pathology  in  Harvard  College.  The  presumption  is 
that  I  am  also  interested  in  science.  I  am,  indeed ;  and  it  is,  in  fact, 
because  I  see  in  this  bill — along  with  some  good  intentions — a  move- 
ment in  favor  of  Ignorance  that  I  am  here  to  oppose  it. 

It  will  inevitably  trammel  the  growth  of  medical  experience  and 
knowledge.  Were  medicine  at  present  a  finished  science,  with  all  prac- 
titioners in  agreement  about  methods  of  treatment,  such  a  bill  as  this, 
to  make  it  penal  to  treat  a  patient  without  having  passed  an  examina- 
tion, would  be  unobjectionable.  But  it  would  also  be  unnecessary  then. 
No  one  would  attempt  to  cure  people  without  the  instruction  required. 

But  the  present  condition  of  medical  knowledge  is  widely  different 
from  such  a  state.  Both  as  to  principle  and  as  to  practice  our  knowl- 
edge is  deplorably  Imperfect.  The  whole  face  of  medicine  changes  un- 
expectedly from  one  generation  to  another  in  consequence  of  widening 
experience;  and,  as  we  look  back  with  a  mixture  of  amusement  and 
horror  at  the  practice  of  our  grandfathers,  so  we  can  not  be  sure  how 
large  a  portion  of  our  present  practice  will  awaken  similar  feelings  in 
our  posterity. 

Each  generation  adds  something,  It  Is  to  be  hoped,  to  the  trenment 
that  will  not  pass  away.  Few  of  us  recall  the  introduction  of  the 
water  cure,  but  many  now  living  can  recall  the  discovery  of  anes- 
thetics. Most  of  us  recollect  when  medical  electricity  and  massage 
came  in,  and  we  have  all  witnessed  the  spreading  triumphs  of  antisep- 
tic surgery,  and  are  now  hearing  of  the  antitoxins  and  of  the  way  in 
which  hypnotic  suggestion  and  all  the  other  purely  mental  therapeutic 
methods  are  achieving  cures. 

Some  of  these  therapeutic  methods  arose  Inside  of  the  regular  pro- 
fession ;  others  outside  of  It.  In  all  cases  they  have  appealed  to  ex- 
perience for  their  credentials.  But  experience  in  medicine  seems  to  be 
an  exceedingly  difficult  thing.  Take  homeopathy,  for  instance,  now 
nearly  a  century  old.  An  enormous  mass  of  experience,  both  of  homeo- 
pathic doctors  and  their  patients,  is  invoked  in  favor  of  the  efficiency 
of  these  remedies  and  doses.  But  the  regular  profession  stands  firm  in 
its  belief  that  such  experience  is  worthless  and  that  the  whole  history 
is  one  of  quackery  and  delusion.  In  spite  of  the  rival  schools  appealing 
to  experience,  their  conflict  is  much  more  like  that  of  two  philosophers 
or  tvrvJ  theologists.  Your  experience,  says  one  side  to  the  other,  simply 
Isn't  fit  to  count. 

So  we  have  great  schools  of  medical  practice,  each  with  its  well- 
satisfied  adherents,  living  "on  in  absolute  ignorance  of  each  other  and 
41917 — 10960 


33 

of  each  other's  experience.  How  many  of  the  graduates,  recent  or 
early,  of  the  Harvard  Medical  School  have  spent  24  hours  of  their 
lives  in  experimentally  testing  homeopathic  remedies  or  seeing  them 
tested?  Probably  not  10  in  the  whole  Commonwealth.  How  many  of 
my  learned  medical  friends,  who  to-day  are  so  freely  denouncing  mind- 
cure  methods  as  an  abominable  superstition,  have  taken  the  pains  to 
follow  up  the  cases  of  some  mind  curer,  one  by  one,  so  as  to  acquaint 
themselves  with  the  results?  I  doubt  if  there  be  a  single  individual. 
Of  such  experience  as  that  they  say  :  "  Give  me  ignorance  rather  than 
knowledge."  And  the  club  opinion  of  the  Massachusetts  Medical 
Society  pats  them  on  the  head  and  backs  them  up.  I  don't  blame  any 
set  of  practitioners  for  remaining  ignorant  of  all  practice  but  their  own. 
The  subject  is  too  overwhelmingly  great.  It  takes  an  entire  life  to 
gain  adequate  experience  of  a  few  diseases  and  a  few  remedial  methods. 
^yhen  a  doctor  notes  what  he  considers  good  effects  from  his  own  prac- 
tice, it  is  natural  for  him  to  let  well  enough  alone  and  refrain  from, 
exploring  unknown  lines.  Here,  as  elsewhere,  individual  success  goes 
the  better  for  a  certain  narrowness,  which  therefore  is  not  wholly 
evil.  But  when  ignorance  and  narrowness,  instead  of  being  humble, 
grow  insolent  and  authoritative  and  ask  for  laws  whose  only  immediate 
result  can  be  to  consecrate  and  perpetuate  them,  then  I  think  that 
every  citizen  interested  in  the  growth  of  a  genuine  complete  medical 
science  should  rise  up  and  protest. 

I  am  here  as  such  a  citizen,  having  no  axes  to  grind  except  the  ax 
of  truth ;  that  "  truth "  for  which  Harvard  University  professes  to 
exist.  I  count  some  of  the  medical  advocates  of  this  proposed  law 
among  my  dearest  friends,  and  well  do  I  know  how  I  shall  stand  in 
their  eyes  hereafter  for  standing  to-day  in  my  present  position.  But 
my  duty  is  to  the  larger  society,  the  Commonwealth.  I  can  not  look 
passively,  and  I  must  urge  my  point. 

That  point  is  this,  that  the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  Is  not  a 
medical  body,  has  no  right  to  a  medical  opinion,  and  should  not  dare 
to  take  sides  in  medical  controversies.  This  safe  neutral  position  the 
friends  of  the  proposed  legislation  summon  the  Commonwealth  imme- 
diately to  give  up.  One  would  suppose  that  any  act  of  sane  persons 
interested  in  the  growth  of  medical  truth  would  rejoice  if  other  persons 
were  found  willing  to  push  out  of  their  experiences  in  the  mental-healing 
direction  and  provide  a  mass  of  material  out  of  which  the  conditions 
and  limits  of  such  therapeutic  methods  at  last  become  clear.  One 
would  suppose  that  our  orthodox  medical  brethren  might  so  rejoice,  but 
instead  of  rejoicing  they  adopt  the  fiercely  partisan  attitude  of  a  power- 
ful trades  union,  demanding  legislation  against  the  competition  of  the 
"  scabs."  They  summon  the  State  to  disregard  absolutely  all  the  pecu- 
liar conditions  under  which  the  mental-healing  operations  flourish  to-day, 
and  say  to  the  mind  curers,  "  Pass  our  State  examinations  or  go  to 
our  State's  prison."  Abstractly  it  sounds  magnificent  to  say  that  our 
State  protects  its  citizens  against  the  ignorance  of  practitioners.  In 
the  living  concreteness  of  the  matter,  however,  not  only  is  such  a  claim 
an  utter  farce,  but  in  this  particular  business  of  mental  healing  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that  if  the  proposed  law  were  really  enforced  it  would 
stamp  out  and  arrest  the  acquisition  of  one  large  branch  of  medical 
experience.  What  the  real  interests  of  medicine  reqifire  is  that  mental 
therapeutics  should  not  be  stamped  out,  but  studied,  and  its  law  ascer- 
tained. For  that  the  mind  curers  must  at  least  be  suffered  to  make 
their  experiments.  If  they  can  not  interpret  their  results  aright,  why 
then  let  the  orthodox  M.  D.'s  follow  up  their  facts  and  study  and  inter- 
pret them.  But  to  force  the  mind  curers  to  a  State  examination  is  to 
kill  the  experiments  outright. 

The  mind  curers  and  their  public  return  the  scorn  of  the  regular 
profession  with  an  equal  scorn  and  will  never  come  up  for  the  exami- 
nation. Their  movement  is  a  religious  or  quasi  religious  movement ; 
personality  is  one  condition  of  success  there,  and  impressions  and  In- 
tuitions seem  to  accomplish  more  than  chemical,  anatomical,  or  physio- 
logical information. 

These  are  the  facts,  gentlemen.  You,  as  legislators,  are  not  bound 
either  to  affirm  or  deny  them  yourselves,  either  to  deplore  them  or 
rejoice  at  them,  or  in  any  way  to  judge  them  from  a  medical  point  of 
view,  but  simply,  after  ascertaining  that  thousands  of  intelligent  citi- 
zens believe  in  them,  decide  whether  to  legislate  or  not.  Do  you  feel 
called  on,  do  you  dare,  to  thrust  the  coarse  machinery  of  criminal  law 
into  these  vital  mysteries,  into  these  personal  relations  of  doctor  and 
patient,  into  these  infinitely  subtle  operations  of  nature,  and  enact  that 
a  whole  department  of  medical  investigation  (for  such  it  is),  together 
with  the  special  conditions  of  freedom  under  which  it  flourishes,  must 
cease  to  be? 

41917—10060 3 


34 

I  venture  to  say  that  you  dare  not,  gentlemen,  yon  dare  not  convert 
the  laws  of  this  Commonwealth  into  obstacles  to  the  acquisition  of 
truth.  You  dare  not  do  it,  gentlemen — and  yet  that  is  what  you  are 
•asked  to  do  exactly  if  you  pass  this  bill. 

Pray  do  not  fail,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  catch  my  point.  You  are  not  to 
ask  yourself  whether  these  mind  curers  do  really  achieve  the  successes 
that  are  claimed.  It  is  enough  for  you,  as  legislators,  to  ascertain  that 
a  large  number  of  our  citizens,  persons  as  intelligent  and  well  educated 
as  yourself  or  I,  persons  whose  number  seems  daily  to  increase,  are  con- 
vinced that  they  do  achieve  them,  are  persuaded  that  a  valuable  new 
department  of  medical  experience  is  by  them  opening  up.  Here  is  a 
purely  medical  question,  regarding  which  our  general  court,  not  being 
a  wellspring  and  source  of  medical  virtue,  not  having  any  private  test 
of  therapeutic  truth,  must  remain  strictly  neutral  under  penalty  of 
making  the  confusion  worse. 

In  the  matter  of  pharmacy,  in  the  matter  of  such  an  art  as  plumb- 
ing, the  legislature  may  impose  examination  and  grant  license  without 
harm.  The  facts  are  here  ultra  pimple  in  comparison,  and  no  differences 
whatever  of  conscientious  opinion  among  the  experts  as  to  what  Is 
right.  But  this  case  of  medical  practice  is  absolutely  different.  It  is 
the  confusion,  the  deplorable  imperfection  of  the  most  expert  knowl- 
edge, and  the  conscientious  divergencies  of  opinion,  the  infinite  complica- 
tion of  the  phenomena,  and  the  varying  and  mutually  exclusive  fields 
of  experience  that  arc  the  very  essence  of  the  case. 

I  know  well  what  those  friends  of  mine  of  the  Massachusetts  Medical 
Society,  who  would  presume  to  act  as  your  advisers,  will  think.  Having 
worked  as  hard  and  as  conscientiously  as  they  have  worked  to  acquire 
the  wisdom  they  possess,  they  will  think  it  little  less  than  treason  in  a 
person  academically  brought  up  to  depreciate  publicly  as  I  do  the  re- 
sults of  all  those  labors.  They  certainly  thought  it  a  gross  insult  when 
I  compared  their  noble  desire  to  purge  the  State  of  quackery  to  the 
greediness  of  a  trades  union  asking  for  legislative  protection  against 
scabs.  Well.  I  hate  to  appear  in  my  brothers'  eyes  as  a  traitor  to  a 
cause  which  for  them  is  identical  with  that  of  science  and  education, 
and  for  which  they  will  burn  with  so  holy  a  zeal,  for  my  cause  is  that 
of  science  and  education,  too.  Heaven  forbid  that  I  should  make  light 
of  the  glorious  achievements  of  modern  surgery.  Taking  one  sort  of 
education  with  another,  a  medical  education  is,  on  the  whole,  as  broad- 
ening and  deepening  an  education  as  I  know. 

And  if  some  fatality  were  laid  on  us  whereby  one  type  of  practi- 
tioners must  perforce  be  singled  out  for  license  and  all  other  types 
stamped  out,  I  should  unhesitatingly  vote  to  license  the  Harvard  Med- 
ical School  type,  for  it  lies  in  the  spirit  of  science  to  correct  its  own 
mistakes  In  the  end,  and  I  should  hope  that  little  by  little,  though  with 
infinite  slowness,  many  of  the  things  well  known  outside  of  the  medical 
schools,  but  not  known  there  at  present,  might  possibly  be  rediscovered 
by  one  adventurous  spirit  or  another  inside,  and  finally  accrete  with  the 
final  body  of  doctrine.  Even  the  mind-cure  methods  might  eventually 
be  resurrected  in  this  way.  But,  thank  heaven,  no  such  fatal  necessity 
of  giving  exclusive  license  to  one  type  of  mind  now  weighs  upon  this 
legislature.  Our  State  needs  the  assistance  of  every  type  of  mind, 
academic  and  nonacademic,  of  which  she  possesses  specimens.  There 
arc  none  too  many  of  them,  for  to  no  one  of  them  can  the  whole  truth 
be  revealed.  Each  is  necessarily  partly  perceptive  and  partly  blind. 
Even  the  very  best  type  is  partly  blind.  There  are  methods  which  it 
can  not  bring  itself  to  use. 

The  blindness  of  a  type  of  mind  is  not  diminished  when  those  who 
have  it  band  themselves  together  in  a  corporate  profession.  By  just 
as  much  as  they  hold  each  other  to  be  thorough  and  conscientious  there, 
by  just  so  much  along  the  other  lines  do  they  not  only  permit  but  even 
compel  each  other  to  be  shallow.  When  I  was  a  medical  student  I  feel 
sure  that  any  one  of  us  would  have  been  ashamed  to  be  caught  looking 
into  a  homeopathic  book  by  a  professor.  We  had  to  sneer  at  homeop- 
athy by  word  of  command.  Such  was  the  school  opinion  at  that  time, 
and  I  imagine  the  similar  encouragements  to  superficiality  in  various 
directions  exist  In  the  medical  schools  of  to-day. 

Now,  as  to  calling  the  Massachusetts  Medical  Society  a  trades  union 
trying  to  influence  legislation  against  scabs,  I  can  hardly  imagine  nn-y 
member  of  the  society  affirming  that  in  the  movement  for  the  present 
bill  tradds-union  motives  are  totally  absent.  Take  a  struggling  prac- 
titioner, young  or  old,  in  a  small  place.  He  has  spent  years  of  life 
and  thousands  of  dollars  in  fitting  himself  for  his  work.  Conscientious 
and  self-sacrificing  to  the  last  degree,  he  deserves  some  acknowledg- 
ment and  reward.  What  can  his  feelings  be  when  he  sees  the  faith 
rurer  alongside  and  the  metaphysical  healer  opposite,  with  no  educa- 
tion, with  no  sacrifices,  with  nothing  but  what  to  him  seems  their  silly 
41917 — 10969 


35 

optimism  rind  preposterous  conceit,  stealing  patients  from  hini  by  the 
dozen  ?  He  can  feel  nothing  but  righteous  indignation  ;  and  when  he 
tells  the  tale  to  his  colleagues,  tbeir  blood  boils  like  his.  The  State 
owes  some  protection  to  us  who  have  done  right,  they  say.  And  the 
medical  politicians  who  run  the  society's  affairs,  however  great  their 
disinterested  zeal  for  the  puMic  health  may  be — and  I  am  the  last  to 
deny  that — assuredly  are  not  altogether  forgetful  of  this  other  aspect 
of  the  case.  The  trades-union  instinct  has  to  be  strong  in  every  profes- 
sional society.  There  are  always  some  members  who,  if  they  had 
power,  would  put  down  heresy  like  Spanish  inquisitors,  and  there  are 
times  when  such  members  may  come  to  the  top. 

Pray,  remember  all  these  facts,  gentlemen  of  the  committee,  in  listen- 
Ing  tb  your  advisers  on  the  opposite  side.  Whatever  you  do,  you  are 
bound  not  to  obstruct  the  growth  of  truth  by  the  freest  gathering  in 
of  the  most  various  experiences.  I  urge  that  the  best  way  to  do  that 
is  to  say  "  hands  off,"  and  let  the  present  law,  which  is  abstractly  a 
good  one,  and  only  four  years  old,  alone. 

The  hinge  of  my  whole  contention,  you  see,  is  that  In  strictly  medical 
quarrels  the  State  has  no  right  to  interfere.  I  know  there  are  other 
aspects  of  this  bill  with  which  every  decent  man  must  sympathize. 
The  flood  of  quackery  and  medical  ignorance  about  us  is  sickening  to 
think  of.  One's  first  impulse  is  to  get  up  and  scream,  saying :  "  Why 
is  there  not  a  law  to  slop  it?  "  One's  heart  bleeds,  one's  fingers  itch  at 
the  persistent  impunity.  But  so  it  is  with  the  vileness  of  our  news- 
papers, with  their  medical  advertisements  and  other  filth,  so  it  is  with 
the  rottenness  of  much  of  our  public  life.  Yet  laws  can  not  reach  such 
symptoms.  Heine  said :  "  Every  nation  has  the  Jews  it  deserves." 
Certainly  every  nation  has  the  newspapers  and  the  politicians  it  de- 
serves. And  it  has  the  medical  practice  it  deserves.  A  people  that 
loves  quacks  will  have  them,  laws  or  no  laws.  Instead  of  crying  for 
legal  protection,  the  medical  profession  ought  to  educate  the  people 
better.  They  must  remember  that  the  aversion  which  they  find  in  the 
public  and  from  which  they  suffer,  has  historic  roots.  The  history  of 
medicine  is  a  really  hideous  history,  comparable  only  with  that  of 
priestcraft — ignorance  clad  in  authority  and  riding  over  men's  bodies 
and  souls.  Let  modern  medicine  dispel  all  those  inherited  prejudices 
by  living  the  historic  memories  down.  It  may  well  be  questioned 
whether  a  regime  of  license  and  monopoly  will  tend  to  hasten  that  even 
as  much  as  one  of  freedom  and  conciliation. 

Above  all  things,  Mr.  Chairman,  let  us  not  be  infected  with  tho 
Gaelic  spirit  of  regulation  and  reglementation  for  their  own  abstract 
sakes.  Let  us  not  grow  hysterical  about  lawmaking.  Let  us  not  fall 
in  love  with  enactments  and  penalties  because  they  are  so  logical  and 
sound  so  pretty  and  look  so  nice  on  paper.  Let  us  cultivate  a  robust 
Anglo-Saxon  spirit  of  insensibility  and  tolerance,  toughening  ourselves 
manfully  to  the  sight  of  much  that  we  abhor,  and  of  still  more  that  we 
can  but  imperfectly  understand.  The  death  rate  is  not  rising,  in  spite 
of  all  quackery.  That  shows  that  we  are  not  in  any  crisis  of  danger, 
and  surely  justifies  you  in  letting  well  enough  alone. 

Mr.  President,  the  broad-minded  view  thus  taken  of  this  ques- 
tion by  one  who  has  been  educated  in  a  medical  school,  and 
whose  sympathies  were  clearly  with  that  school  of  healing, 
makes  one  think  better  of  his  country.  It  is  a  bright  light 
shining  out  of  the  darkness  of  intolerance  and  bigotry. 

The  bill  was  defeated  in  Massachusetts,  much  to  the  credit  of 
the  State.  The  effort  to  secure  its  passage  was  attempted  again 
this  year,  as  it  has  been  every  year  for  several  years  past,  but 
the  effort  signally  failed.  It  is  said,  whether  truthfully  or  not 
I  do  not  know,  that  Prof.  James  was  reprimanded  by  the  then 
president  of  Harvard  University  for  his  utterances  on  this  occa- 
sion and  cautioned  against  repeating  them,  the  reason  given 
being  that  it  was  a  direct  reflection  on  the  Harvard  Medical 
School. 

The  estimation  in  which  medical  healing  is  held  is  indicated 
by  the  following  editorial  from  the  San  Francisco  Call : 

Medical,  hygienic,  and  therapeutic  freedom  will  supply  the  subjects 
for  consideration  at  the  conference  of  the  northern  California  branch 
of  the  League  of  Medical  Freedom,  which  meets  in  this  city  on  Thurs- 
day. The  league  represents  a  movement  that  stands  for  liberty  and 
freedom  from  the  dictation  of  this  or  that  school  of  medicine.  It  is 
41917—10969 


36 

constitutionally  and  radically  opposed  to  setting  up  an  official  orthodoxy 
in  the  practice  of  medicine.  It  is  opposed  to  the  movement  that  would 
place  in  the  hands  of  one  school  an  artificially  created  authority  to 
enforce  its  doctrines,  practices,  and  beliefs  on  an  unwilling  public. 

If  medicine  were  an  exact  science  there  might  be  some  apology  for 
the  legal  enforcement  of  orthodox  practices,  but  this  is  notoriously  not 
the  case.  "  Doctors  differ  "  as  much  and  as  widely  to-day  as  they  did 
a  hundred  years  ago.  For  example,  the  believers  in  Christian  Science 
are  legion  and,  although  they  are  not  medically  orthodox,  we  know, 
everybody  knows,  that  they  have  accomplished  valuable  and  even  mar- 
velous results.  The  movement  formulated  in  the  Owen  bill,  now  pend- 
ing before  Congress,  for  the  creation  of  a  national  health  department, 
is  intended  primarily  to  set  up  a  medical  orthodoxy'  invested  with 
power,  if  not  to  prohibit,  at  least  to  hamper,  practitioners  and  patients 
who  do  not  hold  the  tenets  of  a  regular  school. 

There  are  a  dozen  differing  schools  of  medicine,  and  one  of  these 
seeks  a  monopoly  created  by  law  and  invested  with  authority  to  make 
things  unpleasant  for  all  whom  they  regard  as  medical  heretics. 

Mr.  President,  it  is  not  only  that  the  practice  of  medicine  is 
not  i\  science  and  is  uncertain  aiid  unreliable,  but  the  political 
and  tyrannical  methods  used  by  the  doctors  in  attempting  to 
force  through  objectionable  and  oppressive  laws  are  subversive 
of  liberty.  The  following,  from  the  Columbus  Medical  Journal, 
shows  how  the  people  regard  such  methods : 

MEDICAL  GRAFT   OPPOSED. 

The  doctors  have  a  bill  before  the  legislature  In  the  State  of  Cali- 
fornia which,  if  passed,  will  give  them  complete  control  of  the  public 
schools  and  reduce  our  school  children  to  a  medical  tyranny  that  could 
not  be  duplicated  anywhere  on  earth.  The  following  is  an  account  of 
it,  taken  from  one  of  the  California  papers : 

"A  bill  in  the  legislature,  drawn  by  Prof.  Leslie,  a  public-school 
teacher  of  Los  Angeles,  is  being  fought  by  the  National  League  for 
Medical  Freedom.  It  is  urged  by  the  allopathic,  or  regular,  doctors. 

"  The  bill  provides  for  the  establishment  in  the  public  schools  of 
California  of  '  health  and  development  supervision.'  Practically  this 
means,  as  elaborated  in  the  bill,  the  hiring  by  the  State  of  hundreds  of 
doctors,  dentists,  nurses,  experts  In  all  the  various  branches  of  mental 
and  physical  upbuilding,  at  a  cost  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars 
a  year.  These  doctors  would  examine  and  treat  pupils  free. 

"  Besides  the  work  of  these  medical  men  in  the  schools,  Prof.  Leslie 
adds :  'An  effective  follow-up  service,  which  shall  bring  about  effective 
cooperation  between  parents,  teachers,  and  school  authorities  in  meeting 
the  demands  of  health,  growth,  and  efficiency  of  pupils,  students,  and 
teachers ;  said  follow-up  service  shall  be  conducted  by  examining  staffs, 
assisted  by  trained  nurses  and  social-service  workers.' 

"  The  bill  puts  all  this  under  the  direction  of  a  State  director  of 
health  and  development  at  $4,000  a  year.  Assisting  him  would  be  an 
Immense  staff  of  physicians  and  all  the  adjuncts  of  hospitals,  labora- 
tories, gymnasiums,  etc. 

"  With  county  medical  directors,  as  planned,  there  might  be  58  of 
those  doctors  alone.  The  possibilities  for  graft  under  the  bill  are 
tremendous.  The  University  of  California  is  designed  to  furnish  the 
main  supply  of  experts  for  the  work.  As  its  medical  schools  are  both 
allopathic,  it  is  readily  seen  that  the  bill  plays  into  the  hands  of  the 
Medical  Trust,  now  firmly  rooted  in  California,  and  would  furnish  it  a 
new  and  magnificent  field  of  operation  and  profit. 

"  It  goes  without  saying  that  no  regular  physician  would  appoint  or 
work  with  others  of  differing  schools.  The  bitterness  of  the  opposing 
factions  in  the  curative  sciences  is  intense.  Leslie,  the  author  of  the 
bill,  who  has  been  here  for  weeks  pushing  it.  is  a  humanitarian,  ap- 
parently without  guile,  but  his  measure  is  believed  by  legislators  who 
have  examined  it  perfectly  fitted  to  make  a  powerful  politico-medical 
machine  which  would  run  schools,  pupils,  and  parents  for  the  benefit  of 
the  allopaths. 

"  The  allopaths  maintain  a  lobby  here  right  along.  Besides,  through 
their  influence '  as  family  physicians  to  a  majority  of  the  more  pros- 
perous citizens  of  the  State,  they  have  decided  influence  with  the  heads 
of  these  families  throughout  California.  All  this  influence  is  being 
used,  except  by  those  allopathic  doctors  who  see  the  evil  of  the  bill. 

"  The  National  League  for  Medical  Freedom  is  against  the  measure. 
This  league  is  composed  of  members  of  all  the  other  schools  of  medi- 
cine, surgery,  etc.,  other  than  the  allopathic.  The  homeopaths,  osteo- 
paths, naturopaths,  eclectics,  Christian  Scientists,  and  others  think  the 
bill  iniquitous. 

41917 — 10969 


37 

"  The  objections  of  the  league  arc  stated  briefly : 

"  There  is  no  necessity  for  such  a  bill.  It  is  un-American,  tyranni- 
cal, and  abridges  individual  liberty. 

"  It  opens  up  possibilities  of  looting  the  State  treasury  and  increas- 
ing taxation  through  the  employment  of  an  army  of  physicians  and  ex- 
perts and  the  establishment  of  numerous  special  schools. 

"It  opens  a  way  for  one  school  of  medicine  to  obtain  a  medical 
monopoly  and  give  them  a  strangle  hold  on  the  public  schools  which 
could  not  be  shaken  off  in  years. 

"  The  league  says  that  the  enactment  of  the  bill  into  law  would  be 
the  beginning  of  medical  slavery  and  State  medicine.  A  fine  and  im- 
prisonment is  to  punish  State  employees  who  fail  to  carry  out  the  pro- 
visions of  the  bill." 

"  The  bill  was  introduced  into  the  assembly  by  Assemblyman  Cattell, 
of  Los  Angeles.  The  allopathic  physicians  of  Californa,  through  the 
State  Medical  Association  and  its  agents  here,  are  determined  to  get  it 
through." 

Fortunately  for  the  good  name  of  California,  this  iniquitous  bill  was 
defeated. 

Following  is  another  account  of  how  they  do  it  in  Illinois : 

[Copy  of  a  letter  circulated  in  Illinois.] 
CHICAGO  MEDICAL  SOCIETY   (ORGANIZED  1852), 

SECRETARY'S  AND  TREASURER'S  OFFICES, 

September  6,  1910. 
Dr.  E.  LANDUS,  Chicago,  111. 

DEAR  DOCTOR  :  In  the  primaries  of  the  respective  political  parties  to 
be  held  September  15,  the  following  candidates  are  deserving  of  con- 
sideration at  the  hands  of  the  medical  profession  residing  in  the 
twenty-fifth  senatorial  district :  Messrs.  Crocker,  Waage,  Freund,  and 
Olson,  each  having  agreed,  if  elected,  to  support  the  medical  profession 
and  the  public  in  the  forty-seventh  general  assembly  in  their  effort  to 
prevent  the  passage  of  any  vicious  medical  legislation. 

At  the  last  session  of  the  legislature  your  Representative  Breldt 
voted  "Yes"  for  senate  bill  214  (osteopathic),  but  did  not  vote  on 
senate  bill  351,  which  was  in  substance  the  same  as  No.  214.  As  no 
organized  effort  was  made  to  prevent  the  enactment  of  No.  214  until 
after  its  passage  in  the  senate,  and  the  fact  that  senators  voting  for 
the  bill  In  many  cases  did  so  under  the  impression  that  the  bill  met 
with  approval  of  the  medical  profession,  we  therefore  feel  that  no 
effort  should  be  made  to  punish  anybody  for  voting  yes  on  214,  but  with 
351  the  situation  is  different.  They  should  be  held  strictly  accountable 
for  voting  yes  on  No.  351. 

Mr.  Hulzee  voted  "  No  "  on  214  ;  was  absent  or  not  voting  on  351. 
Deserving  of  your  condemnation  politically  is  Charles  L.  Fieldstack. 
who  voted  "  Yes  "  on  No.  214,  and,  in  spite  of  the  missionary  work  that 
was  done  and  the  pressure  brought  to  bear  from  his  physician  con- 
stituents, he  repeated  the  dosage  by  voting  "  Yes "  on  351,  and  he 
should  be  held  strictly  accountable  for  so  voting,  as  both  were  vicious 
measures  granting  special  privileges  to  certain  cults  who  desired  to 
enter  the  practice  by  a  short  and  easy  route — medicine.  It  is  incum- 
bent upon  the  physicians  in  the  twenty-fifth  senatorial  district  to  see 
that  Mr.  Fieldstack  is  eliminated  politically  on  September  15. 

Every  family  in  the  twenty-fifth  senatorial  district  is  attended  by 
some  member  of  our  profession.  Our  power  is  great  if  we  make  a 
concerted  move.  It  is  up  to  you  to  do  your  part.  Will  you  do  it?  Let 
us  hear  from  you. 

Fraternally,  yours, 

ALEXANDER  II.  FERGUSON,  M.  D.,  Chicago, 

President. 
ALFRED  C.  COTTON,  M.  D.,  Chicago, 

President. 
GEO.  F.  SUKER,  M.  D.,  Chicago, 

Secretary. 
EDMUND  W.  WEIS,  M.  D.,  Ottawa, 

Secretary. 

J.   V.   FOWLKR,  M.   D..   Chicago. 
J.  M.   LANIN,  M.  D.,  Chicago, 

Chairman. 

M.  S.  MARCV,  M.  D.,  Peoria, 
CHAS.  J.  WHALEN,  M.  D.,  Chicago, 

Chairman. 
Public  Relations  Committee  of  Chicago  Medical  Society, 

Committee  on  Medical  Legislation, 

Illinois  State  Medical  Society. 
41917— 100GO 


38 

N.  B. — Most  voters  have  no  special  choice  and  few  wfll  refuse  their 
family  doctor.  Get  busy.  There  is  another  point,  you  want  to  re- 
membe  •  :  Tf  you  happen  tr>  1^  o'  opposite  political  faith,  it  is  no  reason 
that  yo^i  have  not  50  or  luu  friends  that  you  can  see  who  are  of  the 
same  political  faith  as  the  candidate.  Don't  forget  the  "  personal 
favor."  We  ask  you  to  see  50  or  100  friends  that  are  voters.  Do  you 
realize  what  this  means?  Eleven  thousand  physicians  In  Illinois  seeing 
the  number  indicated  would  amount  to  the  following :  Eleven  thousand 
times  50  equals  550.000  voters.  This  means  victory,  something  that 
each  individual  physician  should  feel  proud  of.  Talk  it  over  with  your 
brother  practitioners  and  clients. 

I  submit  another  newspaper  item  from  Medical  Freedom, 
taken  from  the  New  Orleans  Times-News.  It  shows  such  per- 
nicious activity  and  indecent  haste  to  secure  the  appointment  of 
a  public  official  who  would  be  friendly  to  the  legislation  the 
doctors  were  seeking  as  to  excite  just  indignation,  and  the  ex- 
tent to  which  they  propose  to  go  in  the  effort  to  procure  favor- 
able action  by  Congress: 

TO    SUCCEED    WYMAN AMERICAN    MEDICAL    ASSOCIATION    SATS    SELECTION 

OP     DE.      WHYTE,     OF     NEW     ORLEANS,     WILL      INSURE     DEPARTMENT     OF 

HEALTH DR.    M'CORUACK,  POLITICAL   MASTER  OF  THE  A.    M.   A.,   STARTED 

HIS     MACHINE     WORKING     BEFORE     GEN.     WYMAN'S     FUNERAL     DATE     HAD 
BEEN    SET. 

It  has  been  no  secret  that  the  A.  M.  A.  opposed  the  late  Walter 
Wyman,  Surgeon  General  of  the  United  States.  Its  members,  made 
many  demands  for  his  retirement  because  he  did  not  use  his  office  to 
lobby  for  their  pet  measure — the  National  Department  of  Health.  The  fol- 
lowing item  from  the  New  Orleans  Times-News  bureau  naively  tells  a 
story  of  political  selfishness,  haste,  and  bad  taste  that  would  be  almost 
incredible  if  it  emanated  from  elsewhere  than  the  "  political  doctors." 

The  item  reads:  "A  boom  has  been  launched,  having  for  its  ob|ect  the 
landing  of  Dr.  J.  H.  Whyte,  head  of  the  United  States  Marine-Hospital 
Service  at  New  Orleans»  for  the  vacancy  as  Surgeon  General,  caused  by 
the  recent  death  of  Dr.  Walter  Wyman.  The  effort  comes  from  Bowling 
Green,  Ky.,  and  the  Louisiana  State  Board  of  Health  was  apprised  of  it 
in  a  letter  received  from  Dr.  .Toseph  McCormack,  of  that  place,  and  a 
member  of  the  council  of  health  and  public  instruction  of  the  American 
Medical  Association,  which  booms  Dr.  Whyte  for  the  place  enthusi- 
astically. 

"  The  following  Is  the  text  of  the  letter  sent  Dr.  Oscar  Dowling,  presi- 
dent of  the  State  board  of  health,  New  Orleans,  La. : 

"  '  DEAR  DOCTOR  :  Am  just  in  receipt  of  a  telegram  announcing  the 
death  of  Gen.  Wyman.  Am  writing  to  know  if  you  will  at  once  bring 
every  influence  to  bear  on  President  Taft,  through  your  Senators,  Repre- 
sentatives, and  others,  to  have  Dr.  Joseph  H.  Whyte,  of  New  Orleans, 
appointed  as  Surgeon  General.  He  is  one  of  the  strongest  men  in  the 
service,  has  always  been  an  active  advocate  of  the  National  Department 
of  Health,  and  his  appointment  almost  assures  its  creation. 

" '  Trusting  in.  your  full  cooperation,  and  asking  to  hear  from  you,  I 
am, 

"  '  Cordially,  youra,  J.  H.  MCCORMACK,  M.  D.'  " 

I  have  no  doubt  that  Dr.  Whyte  is  a  very  worthy  man  and 
would  have  made  a  good  Surgeon  General,  but  it  is  fortunate 
that  he  was  not  appointed  with  such  influences  behind  him.  It 
is  quite  likely  that  his  support  defeated  him,  for  the  President 
knew  of  this  letter  before  the  appointment  was  made,  and  the 
President  is  a  just  man  possessed  of  a  high  sense  of  decency 
and  the  proprieties. 

COLLECTION    AND    DISSEMINATION    OF    INFORMATION. 

The  bill  provides: 

That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  bureau  of  health  to  collect  and  dis- 
seminate information  relating  to  the  public  health. 

This  is  one  of  the  most  deadly  provisions  in  the  bill.  This 
Government  is  now  spending  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars 
to  send  broadcast  the  details  of  sickness,  disease,  and  suffering. 
It  is  by  this  means  planting  the  seeds  of  disease  and  killing 
more  innocent  and  unsuspecting  people  than  drugs  ever  saved. 
41917— 109C9 


39 

The  people  are  being  taught  to  think  of  sickness,  disease,  and 
death  wheii  they  should  be  thinking  of  health  and  life.  Doctors 
are  traveling  all  over  the  country  describing  the  symptoms  and 
causes  of  tuberculosis  and  other  life-destroying  diseases,  not 
only  to  grown  men  and  women,  but  to  school  children.  They 
describe  the  so-called  disease  germs  or  microbes  and  their  effects 
on  the  body,  and  picture,  by  word  of  mouth  and  by  charts,  illus- 
trated lectures,  and  moving  pictures,  the  ravages  of  the  disease. 
These  horrifying  and  gruesome  pictures  and  senseless  and  in- 
human details  of  the  causes  and  ravages  of  disease  excite  the 
very  fear  that  breeds  and  fosters  disease.  These  lectures  are 
given  in  the  schools  and  innocent  children  are  made  their  vic- 
tims. Instead  of  being  encouraged,  it  should  be  made  a  crime. 

I  have  a  letter  written  by  a  lady  to  the  League  for  Medical 
Freedom  calling  attention  to  one  case  of  this  kind.  Fortunately 
the  chief  offender  in  this  case  was  not  a  doctor.  He  was  the 
representative  of  the  Antituberculosis  Society.  But  the  incom- 
prehensible thing  about  it  is  that  the  teachers  and  officers  of 
the  public  schools  in  an  enlightened  community  should  allow 
such  an  outrage  to  be  committed.  The  letter  is  as  follows: 

luclosed  please  find  a  few  clippings  that  may  be  of  interest  to  you. 
Mr.  Dee  Brown — he  is  not  a  doctor  of  medicine,  but  of  philosophy — is 
being  paid  by  the  Anti-Tuberculosis  Society  to  come  here  and  enter  on. 
a  campaign  of  a  month  to  address  all  the  schools  in  the  city  and  edu- 
cate them  along  the  lines  of  symptoms  and  their  results  of  this  disease. 
They  started  in  on  Friday,  and  it  happened  that  they  went  to  the 
grade  schools  on  the  west  side — that  is,  those  that  are  in  the  section 
we  call  the  Union  School — by  noon  they  reached  the  Union  High  and 
assembled  the  high-school  children  in  one  of  the  rooms.  He  went  into 
the  minutest  detail  of  the  symptoms  of  this  disease,  and  told  them 
that  they  might  have  the  disease  and  not  know  it ;  that  many  times 
the  tissues  of  the  lungs  were  so  badly  gone  before  the  patient  knew 
that  he  had  the  disease  that  there  was  "no  help  for  him.  He  said  some- 
times you  may  have  a  tired  feeling  in  the  morning;  this  is  one  of  the 
marked  symptoms.  You  may  have  a  flush  on  your  cheeks,  and  not 
know  this  is  one  of  the  worst  symptoms,  and  he  went  on  down  the 
lino.  He  filled  the  children  so  full  of  fear  that  one  beautiful  tall  girl 
fell  in  a  dead  faint  on.  the  hard  floor,  striking  on  her  temple,  and  they 
were  obliged  to  call  a  carriage  and  send  her  home,  and  when  one  of 
the  teachers  called  at  the  home  Saturday  afternoon  she  had  not  re- 
gained consciousness  enough  to  realize  what  had  happened  to  her.  She 
is  still  under  a  doctor's  care,  with  a  very  bad  black  eye  and  face.  Two  , 
other  girls  were  helped  out  of  the  room  and  one  or  two  others  braced 
up  by  the  teachers,  and  the  boys  fairly  turned  pale. 

Everybody  supposed,  of  course,  he  was  a  physician,  and  they  could 
not  understand  his  unprofessional  way  of  presenting  his  subject'  to 
these  children.  They  teach  these  children  to  have  implicit  confidence 
in  what  they  teach  them,  and,  of  course,  their  thought  is  receptive. 
After  the  talk  the  children  stood  around  in  groups  and  expressed  them- 
selves as  being  very  much  disturbed  because  they  were  obliged  to 
listen  to  such  stuff,  and  a  number  of  them  went  to  the  teachers  after- 
wards and  asked  why  they  were  obliged  to  listen  to  it. 

Monday  morning  he  went  to  the  Central  High,  and  his  talk  was  the 
first  hour.  They  locked  the  session  doors  and  compelled  all  the 
children  to  enter  the  general  assembly  hall. 

Saturday,  Sunday,  and  Monday  we  got  busy  on  this  work,  and  did 
all  we  could  to  have  the  lecture  toned  down  and  the  worst  part  elimi- 
nated, but  now  we  are  setting  about  to  have  the  entire  lecture  course 
eliminated.  We  have  appealed  to  the  parents  of  our  city,  as  many  as 
we  can  reach  over  the  phone,  and  asked  them  to  send  in  protests  to  the 
board  of  education.  Last  evening  was  the  regular  monthly  meeting  of 
the  board,  and  a  few  went  up  to  the  meeting  and  personally  protested, 
which  resulted  in  a  committee  of  three  being  appointed  to  investigate 
the  matter  and  hear  some  of  his  lectures.  I  do  not  think  he  will  dare 
to  give  again  the  talk  that  he  gave  to  the  Union  High  children. 

This  man  has  just  finished  a  campaign  in  Wisconsin,  covering  the 
State  completely,  and  he  has  now  entered  Michigan  to  do  the  same 
thing.  I  am  going  into  detail,  thinking  it  may  be  of  some  help  to  you 
with  the  work  in  the  State,  and  if  Detroit  has  planned  for  a  similar 
campaign  you  will  be  better  prepared  to  head  it  off. 
41917—10069 


40 

We  had  a  talk  with  the  girl's  attending  physician  and  he  said  it 
was  outrageous.  Such  talk  should  never  he  allowed  in  even  one  in- 
stance, etc.  He  gave  us  the  privilege  of  using  his  name,  but,  as  he  has 
stated,  he  is  not  an  agitator  and  he  is  not  one  to  stir  things  up  much. 

I  hope  you  will  advertise  this,  for  it  needs  all  the  publicity  we  can 
give  it.  Sir.  Weston  is  writing  an  article  for  us  this  week  and  we  are 
going  to  send  out  500  of  them  to  the  parents  of  school  children.  We 
have  a  meeting  of  the  executive  committee  of  the  league  this  afternoon 
and  we  will  plan  something  in  the  way  of  a  protest.  We  are  doing  all 
we  can  to  have  it  eliminated  from  the  schools,  and  if  they  want  to  give 
such  talks  to  give  them  to  the  adults. 

With  best  wishes  to  all, 

Sincerely,  FRANCES  W.  SPEARMAN. 

Mr.  President,  see  how  this  idea  grows.  Here  is  another  en- 
lightened guardian  of  the  public  health  proposing  to  educate 
children  in  the  knowledge  of  disease  by  introducing  moving 
pictures  of  the  ravages  of  tuberculosis  and  disease  germs.  He 
got  the  idea  from  a  young  girl  who  had  learned  to  "  describe 
the  formation  and  construction  of  tuberculosis  bacillus  to  a 
surprising  degree,"  he  says.  And  she  got  this  gruesome  in- 
formation from  illustrated  lectures  in  Carnegie  Hall,  in  New 
York.  Here  is  the  account  given  of  it  by  the  Memphis  Press : 

As  to  the  paths  to  be  pursued  before  this  term  end  by  public-school 
children  in  search  of  facts  pertaining  to  health  welfare,  it  is  probable 
that  "  a  child  shall  lead  them."  For  it  was  a  child's  knowledge  of 
things  beyond  the  ken  of  physiology  textbooks  in  the  public  s'chool 
which  set  Dr.  M.  Goltman,  city  healther,  to  thinking  out  a  plan  for 
furthering  the  knowledge  of  school  children  in  the  matter  of  health. 

As  a  result  lectures  on  health  subjects,  illustrated  by  moving  pictures, 
will  sooner  or  later  become  a  feature  of  public-school  instruction.  This 
will  follovv  the  advent  of  more  school  inspectors,  which  Dr.  Goltman 
is  now  striving  to  have  added  to  the  meager  force. 

"  I  got  my  idea  from  conversation  with  my  13-year-old  niece  in  the 
East,"  said  Dr.  Goltman.  "  She  was  able  to  describe  the  formation  and 
construction  of  tuberculosis  bacillus  to  a  surprising  degree,  and  she 
knew  other  things  a  growing  child  should  know,  and  knew  them  in  the 
right  way.  I  was  astounded,  and  asked  if  she  learned  those  things  in 
school.  She  said  no ;  that  she  attended  illustrated  lectures  at  Carnegie 
Hall  and  like  places,  because  she  was  interested.  These  places  are 
open  to  those  who  care  to  attend  in  New  York,  but  I  thought  to  myself, 
'  Why  not  build  up  a  course  of  study  and  instruction  in  the  public 
schools  along  those  lines?'  And  if  I  have  my  say,  Memphis  will  have 
the  first  regular  course  in  its  public  schools  of  health  and  hygiene  with 
the  aid  of  moving  pictures,  thus  going  New  York  one  better  in  its 
estimable  work." 

One  would  think  this  fearful  raid  on  the  health  and  lives  of 
the  children  might  stop  there.  But  the  doctors  seem  to  be  vie- 
ing  with  each  other  in  efforts  to  disease  the  minds  of  innocent 
children  and  ignorant  adults.  At  the  sixty-fifth  annual  meet- 
ing of  the  Ohio  State  Medical  Association  Dr.  C.  C.  Probst,  of 
Columbus,  in  an  address  on  "  The  protection  of  child  life,"  said : 

More  progress  would  be  made  If  no  further  effort  were  made  to 
"  teach  old  dogs  new  tricks,"  but  attention  should  be  devoted  to  the 
training  of  the  school  children  in  hygiene  and  sanitation  and  physical 
education.  This  would  mean  a  new  man  in  school  life — a  school  physi- 
cian. It  would  mean  school  supervision,  not  school  inspection. 

And  at  the  sixty-first  annual  meeting  of  the  American  Medi- 
cal Association,  at  St.  Louis,  June,  1910,  the  use  of  the  theater 
as  a  means  of  conveying  information  about  disease  and  disease 
germs  was  recommended.  Dr.  Masyck  P.  Ravenal,  of  Madison, 
Wis.,  had  this  to  say  on  the  subject : 

In  regard  to  the  use  of  the  theater  for  instructing  the  public  along 
the  lines  of  preventive  medicine,  may  I  tell  you  what  we  have  done  in 
Wisconsin?     Many    of   you   have    probably   seen    notices    in   the   news- 
41917— 109G9 


41 

papers  of  the  play  "  In  Germlnnd."  This  was  given  by  the  younR 
Indies  taking  work  in  the  department  of  bacteriology  and  hygiene  at 
the  University  of  Wisconsin.  The  characters  were  all  dressed  in  cos- 
tumes representing  as  nearly  as  possible  various  germs  as  we  see 
them  in  stained  preparations,  both  the  useful  and  the  harmful  germs 
being  represented.  No  charge  was  made  for  admission,  cards  of  invi- 
tation being  issued.  It  was  given  as  a  department  matter  for  our  own 
entertainment  and  Instruction,  yet  the  demand  for  admission  from 
outside  taxed  the  resources  of  our  hall  to  the  utmost,  and  throughout 
the  country  the  greatest  interest  was  excited. 

Our  stage  scenery  was  made  as  instructive  as  possible.  We  showed 
dirty  roller  towels  on  the  wall,  spittoons,  garbage  cans  marked  "  No. 
23,"  the  common  drinking  cup,  the  common  sponge,  the  feather  duster, 
the  broom — emphasizing  as  much  as  possible  the  bad  features  of  such 
things.  We  had  a  large  rat  trap  containing  the  rats  which  the  womea 
have  been  wearing  in  their  hair  so  much  of  late.  A  garbage  barrel 
filled  with  broken  bottles  and  tin  cans  was  called  the  "  Germ-ania 
Theater,"  and  the  play  announced  was  "  The  Place,  the  Man,  and  the 
Germ." 

These  things  as  we  presented  them  were  quite  amusing.  They  catch 
the  popular  eye  and  at  the  same  time  give  a  great  amount  of  instruc- 
tion to  those  who  have  never  thought  on  such  matters  before.  This 
play  is  being  revised  and  improved,  and  during  the  coming  year  is  to 
be  put  on  the  stage  by  professionals.  I  am  sure  this  sort  of  work  wUl 
do  an  enormous  amount  of  good  in  educating  the  public. 

But  the  height  of  cruelty  and  folly  seems  to  have  been  reached 
by  the  Kansas  State  Board  of  Health.  It  has  published  a 
'•  health  almanac."  In  its  number  of  December,  1911,  the  board 
assumes  to  let  the  people  know  what  diseases  they  may  look  for- 
ward to  each  month  in  the  year.  It  opens  with  a  repulsive  pic- 
ture of  a  woman  cruelly  pitted  with  smallpox,  with  the  state- 
ment under  it,  "  Never  vaccinated."  But  this  is  not  really  the 
worst  of  it.  They  take  a  page  of  their  so-called  almanac  for  a 
disease  with  the  following  headings:  "January  for  smallpox, 
February  for  pneumonia,  March  for  measles,  April  for  whooping 
cough,  May  for  good  wells  and  good  water,"  with  the  cheering 
statement  for  May  that — 

Bad  or  impure  water  is  more  dangerous  than  the  deadliest  poison 
and  always  affects  those  who  drink  it.  Wells  are  polluted  by  organic 
matter  getting  into  them.  This  matter  comes  from  human  beings  or 
from  animals  and  is  always  bad  for  those  who  drink  It.  If  it  comes 
from  a  case  of  typhoid  or  from  a  person  who  carries  typhoid  germs  and 
gets  into  the  well  it  will  produce  typhoid  fever  in  those  who  drink  it, 

June  for  infants'  complaints,  July  for  flies  and  mosquitoes, 
August  for  typhoid  fever,  September  for  diphtheria,  October  for 
scarlet  fever,  November  for  colds  and  influenza,  and  December 
for  consumption. 

These  doctors,  if  they  are  worthy  of  the  name,  know  that  two 
great  causes  of  disease  are  fear  and  suggestion  and  that  sugges- 
tion is  the  prolific  cause  of  fear,  disease,  and  death.  And  yet 
they  deliberately  send  out  broadcast,  at  public  expense,  a  sug- 
gestion— probably  a  false  one,  but  that  makes  no  difference- 
that  in  each  month  of  the  year  a  specific  and  deadly  disease 
may  be  expected  and  feared.  It  is  the  refinement  of  cruelty 
and  the  depth  of  ignorance  in  a  matter  of  life  and  death  if  it 
is  not  malicious.  This  persistent  suggestion  of  disease  and  its 
alleged  causes  is  creating  more  disease  and  sacrificing  more 
lives  than  are  all  the  germs  that  have  been  discovered  or 
imagined  by  man. 

Mr.  President,  I  said  a  moment  ago  that  I  thought  the  height 
of  cruelty  and  folly  had  been  reached  by  the  State  board  of 
health  of  Kansas,  but  I  have  discovered  something  even  worse 
41917—10969 


42 

than  that.  What  is  called  "A  circular  for  school  children " 
has  been  distributed  in  some  of  the  schools  of  this  country  that 
seems  to  me  to  go  further  in  the  way  of  spreading  improper  in- 
formation than  anything  I  have  yet  seen  It  pictures  a  small 
boy  examining  disease  germs  through  z.  microscope.  The  cir- 
cular says : 

Then  there  are  so  many  bad  fairies  which  cause  disease.  Different 
kinds  of  them  cause  different  diseases.  *  *  *  These  little  fairies 
are  called  bacteria  or  germs  and  are  the  smallest  of  all  living  things. 
They  are  found  everywhere — in  the  air,  the  soil,  the  water,  in  our 
bodies.  A  quart  of  well  water  would  contain  a  million  of  them. 

Then  follow  illustrations  of  the  different  kinds  of  deadly  dis- 
ease germs  with  a  statement  under  each  group  of  the  diseases 
they  cause.  Then  the  circular  undertakes,  by  illustration,  to 
show  how  the  germs  of  tuberculosis  are  carried.  The  point  of 
a  pencil  is  pictured,  covered  with  such  germs  as  come  from 
the  mouth  of  the  victim,  and  the  picture  of  a  fly  is  set  out  with 
Its  legs  loaded  with  disease  germs.  A  picture  of  a  sick  man  in 
his  invalid  chair  is  given,  with  children  taking  some  of  his 
food  from  a  spoon,  with  the  statement  under  it :  "  The  genus 
that  attack  us  come  from  the  bodies  of  the  sick."  Other  pictures 
of  the  means  by  which  disease  is  conveyed  are  given. 

An  emaciated  consumptive,  apparently  in  the  last  stage  of 
the  disease,  is  pictured  as  spitting  upon  the  floor,  and  a  woman 
sweeping  up  the  sputum  after  it  has  dried.  A  little  child  is 
pictured  as  sitting  near  by,  with  the  statement  under  this  pic- 
ture, "  The  germs  may  enter  the  bodies  of  children  playing  on 
the  floor."  Two  "persons  are  pictured  as  sitting  at  a  table,  one 
of  them  a  consumptive,  with  the  statement  below  it,  "  Others 
may  get  the  disease  by  breathing " ;  and  still  another  case,  a 
small  boy,  emaciated  by  the  disease,  taking  a  bite  of  something, 
with  two  healthy-looking  little  fellows  standing  by,  saying, 
"  Give  us  a  bite,"  with  the  statement  under  this  picture, 
"  Putting  food,  money,  pencils,  etc.,  into  the  mouth  after  a 
consumptive  has  poisoned  them  with  his  spit." 

Now,  Mr.  President,  I  can  not  conceive  of  anything  more  cruel 
and  inhuman  than  the  loading  of  the  minds  of  little  children 
with  such  information  as  this.  Physical  ill  treatment  or  abuse 
can  not  be  compared  to  it,  and  yet  I  find  the  superintendents 
and  teachers  of  the  schools  and  boards  of  education  not  only 
permitting  this  sort  of  literature  to  go  into  the  schools  but 
actually  encouraging  it.  They  may  be  partially  excused  by 
their  apparent  ignorance  of  the  palpable  consequences  of  such 
impressions  upon  the  minds  of  the  young,  because  like  a  good 
many  other  people  in  this  country  they  do  not  think  for  them- 
selves or  try  to  understand  the  effects  of  such  suggestions  as 
this  circular  contains,  but  accept  it  because  the  doctors  approve 
It.  I  am  sorry  to  bring  to  even  the  attention  of  the  United 
States  Senate  such  brutal  and  inhuman  suggestions;  and  when 
one  thinks  of  filling  the  minds  of  children  with  this  kind  of 
stuff,  it  is  nothing  less  than  horrifying. 

Fortunately,  some  public  officials,  not  doctors,   are  humane 

and  sensible  enough  to  attempt  to  stay  this  fearful  filling  of 

the  minds  of  children  with   these  hideous  details  of  disease. 

The  mayor  of  San  Francisco,  Cal.,  is  one  of  these.     I  submit 

41917— 109G9 


43 

for  the  consideration  of  the   Senate  an  editorial   in   the   San 
Francisco  Star  of  February  12,  1912: 

A    WORD   FOR   TUB    MICROBES. 

Here  are  recent  words  of  Mayor  Rolph  that  are  commended  to  your 
consideration  : 

"  I  think  you  should  go  slow  about  the  methods  of  eradicating 
tuberculosis.  I  hear  so  many  mothers  In  the  mission  say  that  this 
tuberculosis  scare  has  been  so  driven  into  the  minds  of  their  children 
that  they  come  home  saying  they  are  filled  with  aches  and  pains,  and 
have  backaches  and  stomach  aches  and  one  thing  and  another.  I  heard 
this  discussed  last  night,  and  that  germs  of  every  human  ill  have  been 
shown  on  magic-lantern  slides — pictures  that  make  children  get  the 
idea  that  their  bodies  are  covered  with  germs.  I  do  think  that  you 
ought  to  be  very  careful  to  first  study  out  well  the  effect  of  all  thia 
and  prevent  what  Is  evidently  intended  to  make  children  think  they 
are  filled  with  all  kinds  of  diseases,  when  you  know,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  they  are  not,  and  that  what  you  are  really  trying  to  do  is  only 
to  prevent  disease." 

Amen.  Also  hallelujah  and  God  save  us.  The  mayor  Is  right.  A 
child  may  be  scared  into  sickness  as  well  as  safeguarded  against  it.  We 
have  overworked  the  microbes,  poor  things.  They  are  good,  bad,  and 
indifferent,  but  no  matter  how  irreproachable  their  character  our  chil- 
dren have  been  indirectly  inoculated  with'  the  Idea  that  they  should  be 
regarded  as  malefactors  and  goblins. 

The  fact  is  that  man  has  slowly  educated  himself  tip  to  the  point 
where  he  is  scared  to  death  by  death.  This  is  why  10,000  fads  of 
healing  bud  and  blossom  in  our  midst.  I  remember  very  well  when  a 
stomach  ache  was  cured  by  Jamaica  ginger  and  a  mustard  plaster. 
Now  the  chances  are  that  nothing  but  removing  the  vermiform  appendix 
will  do  the  business ;  after  that,  if  one  has  a  stomach  ache  he  may  try 
the  old  remedies. 

Again,  the  mayor  is  right.  We  show  our  kids  pictures  In  which 
human  flesh  is  portrayed  as  the  grazing  ground  of  all  sorts  of  apparent 
antediluvian  monsters.  What  wonder  if  the  half-formed  minds  of  the 
children  get  the  idea  that  there  is  not  much  hope  for  them  ;  if  they  are 
"filled  with  aches  and  pains  and  have  backaches  and  stomach  aches"? 
Deuce  take  it !  how  can  they  expect  anything  else  with  megatheriums 
and  other  bacilli  at  work? 

The  Ohio  State  Journal  in  its  issue  of  November  27,  1911, 
contained  this  sensible  editorial  on  this  subject: 

THINKING   HEALTH. 

We  find  this  very  suggestive  paragraph  In  a  book  entitled  "  Thil- 
osophy  of  Self-Help  "  : 

"  The  most  prevalent  and  the  most  dangerous  of  all  forms  of  infec- 
tion is  mental.  It  is  far  easier  to  get  bacteria  out  of  the  body  than 
to  eradicate  disease  germs  from  the  mind  once  they  get  In.  Thinking 
and  talking  about  disease  prepare  the  mental  sofl  for  its  reception. 
Fear  and  expectancy  promote  its  growth." 

We  apply  this  thought  to  medical  inspection  of  schools,  which  tenda 
to  fill  the  minds  of  the  children  with  thoughts  of  disease.  It  is  en- 
tirely uneducational  to  do  so.  It  is  the  easiest  thing  In  the  world  to 
transfer  an  ailment  of  the  body  into  a  disease  of  the  mind,  and  when 
that  becomes  a  child's  condition,  he  goes  through  the  schools  carrying 
a  heavy  load.  And  that  condition  of  the  mind  tends  to  promote  disease. 
One  disturbs  the  free  activity  of  the  mind  by  turning  it  In  on  physical 
ills. 

The  best  hope  of  health  is  to  think  health,  and  that  suggests  the  sort 
of  education  a  child  is  entitled  to.  It  will  be  a  hard  matter  for  even 
a  well  child  to  grow  grand  and  good  out  of  a  consciousness  of  surround- 
ing physical  ills. 

Mr.  President,  the  doctors  are  using  every  means  possible  to 
get  themselves  into  the  schools.  They  are  trying  to  teach  un- 
thinking people  that  this  is  necessary  to  the  public  health. 
What  a  dreadful  mistake !  The  presence  of  the  doctor  who 
thinks  nothing  and  talks  nothing  but  disease,  is  full  of  fear  of 
microbes  and  the  thousands  of  causes  of  disease  that  had  better 
never  have  been  known,  is  little  better  than  a  death's  head  in 
41917 — 10969 


44 

the  schoolroom.  Better  have  someone  to  teach  the  children 
that  good  is  more  powerful  than  evil ;  that  we  make  disease  by 
thinking  it ;  and  to  be  thinking  of  better  and  higher  things  than 
the  material  causes  of  disease.  This  will  never  be  a  healthy 
Natio"  until  the  people  are  freed  mentally .  from  this  dreadful, 
all-pervading  fear  of  disease.  Men  and  women  burdened  with 
all  these  false  beliefs  and  fears  are  slaves  to  their  wrong  view 
of  life. 

Mr.  President,  this  nefarious  onslaught  on  young  children 
find  the  spread  of  disease  through  suggestion  and  fear  has 
grown  worse  and  worse.  And  now  the  Government  is  to  be 
asked  to  become  a  party  to  this  spreading  of  disease  by  collect- 
ing and  disseminating  like  information  for  the  whole  country 
to  read.  What  a  fearful  responsibility  must  rest  upon  the 
people  who  are  disseminating  such  information. 

Every  doctor  worthy  of  the  name  knows  that  fear  is  one  of 
the  most  prolific  causes  of  disease.  He  knows,  too,  that  sug- 
gestion of  disease  is  equally  deadly  in  its  effects,  especially  on 
the  timid  and  fearful.  And  yet,  with  full  knowledge  of  this, 
they  set  about  in  the  most  direct  and  forceful  way  to  suggest 
the  existence  and  presence  of  the  very  diseases  they  claim  to 
be  combating  and  to  implant  in  the  minds  of  the  old  and'  young 
the  fear  that  engenders  the  disease.  If  the  evidence  of  this 
cruel  wrong  was  not  so  direct  and  positive  it  would  be  beyond 
belief.  A  very  interesting  article  on  the  effects  of  fear,  by  Dr. 
Orison  Swett  Harden,  was  published  in  the  Philadelphia  Even- 
ing Bulletin  February  24,  1912,  and  is  worthy  of  the  attention 
of  the  Senate.  It  is  as  follows: 

Fear  in  all  its  different  phases  of  expression,  such  as  worry,  anxiety, 
anger,  jealousy,  timidity,  is  the  greatest  enemy  of  the  human  race.  It 
has  robbed  man  of  more  happiness  and  efficiency,  has  made  more  men 
cowards,  more  people  failures,  or  forced  them  into  mediocrity,  than  any- 
thing else. 

Fear  has  a  paralyzing,  blighting  influence  upon  the  whole  being.  It 
Impoverishes  the  blood  and  destroys  health  by  impairing  the  digestion, 
cutting  off  nutrition,  and  lowering  the  physical  and  mental  vitality.  It 
crushes  hope,  kills  courage,  and  so  enfeebles  the  mind's  action  that  it 
can  not  create  or  produce. 

Many  people  are  afraid  of  nearly  everything.  They  are  afraid  of  a 
draft,  afraid  of  getting  chilled  or  taking  cold,  afraid  to  eat  what  they 
want,  to  venture  in  business  matters  for  fear  of  losing  their  money, 
afraid  of  public  opinion.  They  have  a  perfect  horror  of  what  Mrs. 
Grundy  thinks.  They  are  afraid  hard  times  are  coming,  afraid  of 
poverty,  afraid  of  failure,  afraid  the  crops  are  going  to  fail,  afraid  of 
lightning  and  tornadoes.  Their  whole  lives  are  filled  with  fear,  fear, 
fear. 

******* 

Fear  strangles  originality,  daring,  boldness ;  it  kills  individuality  and 
weakens  all  the  mental  processes.  Great  things  are  never  done  under  a 
sense  of  fear  of  some  impending  danger.  All  work  done  when  one  is 
suffering  from  a  sense  of  fear  or  foreboding  has  little  efficiency.  Fear 
always  indicates  weakness,  the  presence  of  cowardice.  What  a  slaugh- 
terer of  years,  what  a  sacrificer  of  happiness  and  ambitions,  what  a 
ruiner  of  careers  this  monster  has  been  ! 

One  of  the  worst  forms  of  fear  is  that  of  a  foreboding  of  some  evil  to 
come,  which  hangs  over  the  life  like  a  threatening  cloud  over  a  volcano 
before  an  eruption. 

Some  people  arc  always  suffering  from  this  peculiar  phase  of  fear, 
They  are  apprehensive  that  some  great  misfortune  is  coming  to  them, 
that  they  are  going  to  lose  their  money  or  their  position  :  or  they  are 
afraid  of  accident  or  that  some  fatal  disease  is  developing  in  them. 
If  their  children  are  away,  they  see  them  in  all  sorts  of  catastrophes — 
railroad  accidents  or  shipwrecks.  They  are  always  picturing  the  worst. 
******* 

41017— 109G9 


45 

The  fear  habit  shortens  life,  for  it  impairs  all  the  physiological  proc- 
esses. Its  power  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  it  actually  changes  the 
chemical  composition  of  the  secretions  of  the  body.  Fear  victims  not 
only  age  prematurely,  but  they  also  die  prematurely.  Oh,  how  many 
victims  fear  has  put  into  the  grave.  It  has  driven  people  into  all  sortg 
of  crime  through  unbalancing  the  mind.  It  has  caused  terrible  trage- 
dies in  human  life. 

There  is  not  a  single  redeeming  feature  about  fear  or  any  of  it3 
numerous  progeny.  It  is  always,  everywhere,  an  unmitigated  curse. 

A  man  who  is  filled  with  fear  is  not  a  real  man.  He  is  a  puppet,  a 
manikin,  an  apology  of  a  man. 

Quit  fearing  things  that  may  never  happen,  just  as  you  would  quit 
any  bad  practice  which  has  caused  you  suffering. 

Mr.  President,  the  dangers  of  disease  and  death  are  kept 
constantly  in  the  public  mind.  People  are  warned  to  avoid  this 
and  shim  that,  and  taught  to  believe  this  means  one  .disease 
and  that  another,  until  the  weak  in  body  or  mind  are  brought 
under  the  influence  of  this  powerful  suggestion  and  the  strong 
are  not  always  able  to  throw  it  off.  Man  is  afraid  of  the  food 
he  eats,  the  water  he  drinks,  and  the  air  he  breathes.  Pos- 
sessed with  fear,  he  shuns  certain  foods  that  he  thinks  are 
hurtful,  he  shuts  out  the  fresh  air,  and  drinks  boiled  or  bot- 
tled water.  He  has  become  a  very  craven,  the  slave  of  his 
unreasonable  fears.  I  have  heard  a  Member  of  this  body  declare 
that  he  could  not  ride  from  the  Capitol  to  the  Office  Building 
in  a  closed  subway  without  taking  cold,  and  therefore  he  walked 
while  others  rode.  Another  is  afraid  to  take  a  drink  of  ice 
water,  because  if  he  drinks  it  it  paralyzes  the  stomach.  Last 
summer  when  the  thermometer  hovered  about  90  the  Sergeant 
at  Arms  had  electric  fans  placed  in  the  Senate  to  relieve  the 
heat,  but  if  one  was  put  in  motion  it  was  ordered  stopped. 
Some  one  was  afraid  it  would  give  him  cold.  And  so  it  would, 
probably ;  not  because  a  little  fresh  air  could  give  anyone  cold, 
but  because  of  his  fears.  If  he  could  learn  not  to  be  afraid, 
and  no  one  else  were  afraid  for  him,  he  would  never  take 
cold.  Job  said,  "  That  which  I  greatly  feared  hath  come  upon 
me."  So  it  is  with  the  man  of  to-day.  To  fear  disease  is 
to  invite  it.  Disease  is  wholly  mental.  The  material  body, 
without  mind,  has  no  sensation.  Destroy  consciousness  and 
the  body  does  not  feel.  The  condition  of  mind  reacts 
on  the  body  and  makes  it  sick  or  well,  according  to  the 
thought  either  of  the  individual  or  others  who  think  about 
him.  Hatred,  malice,  revenge,  fear,  and  other  wrong  thoughts 
are  the  breeders  of  disease.  Every  competent  physician  will 
tell  you  so.  And  yet  these  same  physicians  are  doing  more  to 
excite  the  fears  of  the  people  than  everybody  else.  And  they 
are  here  now,  urging  Congress  to  authorize  the  Government  to 
put  out  printed  information  that  will  feed  the  fears  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  whole  Nation  and  engender  more  diseases  and  sacri- 
fice more  lives  than  ever  the  doctors  will  heal  or  save.  If  the 
people  could  once  be  taught  to  think  and  talk  health  and  not 
disease,  harmony  and  not  discord,  faith  and  trust  and  not  fear, 
life  and  not  death,  a  health  department  need  not  be  thought  of. 
If  the  people  could  only  be  taught  to  trust  in  an  omnipotent 
and  good  God  instead  of  the  doctor  and  his  remedies,  and 
thereby  cast  off  all  fear,  disease  would  be  unknown.  To  one 
having  some  of  this  faith  and  trust  that  dispels  fear  in  the 
degree  that  one  trusts  and  understands,  the  thought  that  is 
41917—10969 


40 

bestowed  upon  disease,  sickness,  and  death,  and  the  power  that 
is  given  to  them  in  the  human  mind  is  little  less  than  appalling. 

Mr.  President,  I  can  not  keep  silent  and  allow  this  Nation  to 
become  a  party  to  this  monstrous  propaganda  of  fear  and  dev- 
astation of  its  people. 

Some  of  the  doctors  have  realized  this  and  sounded  a  warn- 
ing. Dr.  P.  L.  Myer,  of  Toledo,  Ohio,  in  an  article  published 
in  the  Journal  of  the  American  Medical  Association  as  far 
back  as  1906,  says: 

Had   we  not  better  hedge  a  little  before  the  great  lay  mind  grasps 
the  fact   that  they   were  frightened   Into   panicky  laws  and   restrictions 
over  will-o'-the-wisp  possibilities  and  not  probabilities  or  actualities? 
******* 

With^all  the  wonderful  strides  of  our  science  in  100  years,  we  still 
have  the  public  as  abjectly  cowed  to-day,  before  the  omnipotent  hosts 
of  bacteria,  as  it  was  by  the  evil  spirits  and  ghosts  and  witches  of  a 
past  century. 

And  in  1910  the  Journal  of  the  American  Medical  Associa- 
tion has  this  very  pertinent  statement  of  prevailing  conditions : 

An  aversion  to  unnecessary  contamination  by  noxious  microorganisms 
may  well  serve  as  a  protection  against  disease;  but  an  insane  terror 
of  infection  may  make  life  very  miserable  without  appreciably  length- 
ening or  strengthening  it.  In  the  first  place,  the  paradise  of  faultless 
prophylaxis — the  aseptic  Eden  which  seems  to  be  the  ideal  of  the 
germophobes — is  unattainable.  We  can  not  banish  microorganisms 
from  our  human  world  ;  we  can  only  try  to  keep  that  balance  of  con- 
ditions most  favorable  to  the  life  of  the  human  organism.  In  the 
second  place,  the  attitude  of  mind,  cultivated  in  the  perpetual  endeavor 
to  evade  disease,  may  be  almost  a  worse  evil  than  the  disease  itself ; 
certainly  it  furnishes  the  best  excuse  for  the  existence  of  those  sects 
which  deny  the  existence  of  all  disease  and  the  usefulness  of  any  pre- 
cautions. "  Life  is  a  dangerous  thing  at  best,  and  very  few  of  us 
get  out  of  it  alive,"  while  those  of  us  who  spend  all  our  energies 
trying  to  elude  its  incidental  risks  might  almost  as  well  never  have 
lived  at  all.  Health  is  largely  a  matter  of  a  proper  balance  of  op- 
posing forces,  and  that  balance  can  be  preserved,  in  part,  by  cultivat- 
ing a  due  measure  of  indifference  to  inevitable  dangers. 

From  the  Ohio  Medical  Journal  of  July,  1898,  after  comment- 
ing upon  the  annual  meeting  of  the  American  Medical  Associa- 
tion of  that  year,  this  is  interesting : 

The  political  part  of  the  convention  continues  to  be  managed  by 
medical  politicians ;  these  gentlemen  constitute  a  sect  apart,  coming 
chiefly  from  St.  Louis  and  Louisville,  and  who  come  with  everything 
cut  and  dried. 

To  which  the  Atlantic  Medical  Weekly  of  August  G,  replied: 

But  granting  it,  *  •  •  most  of  the  members  attend  the  sessions 
of  the  American  Medical  Association  for  other  reasons  and  with  other 
purposes  than  to  engage  in  political  bickerings,  and  are  only  too  glad 
there  are  others  to  do  this  work  for  them.  *  *  *  They  get  but  an 
empty  honor,  forgotten  before  the  next  session,  and  have  a  great  deal 
of  labor  for  their  pains. 

WOULD   FORCE    LEGISLATION. 

From  a  report  of  the  one  hundred  and  third  annual  meeting  of 
the  Medical  Society  of  the  State  of  New  York,  held  at  Albany, 
January,  1909,  and  published  in  the  Journal  of  the  American 
Medical  Association,  February  G,  1909: 

If  the  Incoming  national  administration  fails  to  establish  a  national 
department  of  health  the  public  health  committees  of  the  State  medical 
societies  should  add  their  force  in  making  public  sentiment  sufficiently 
Strong  to  force  this  movement  through. 
41917— 109G9 


47 

Dr.  Larkin,  of  Hillsboro,  Ohio,  in  an  address  to  his  local 
county  society,  a  branch  of  the  American  Medical  Association, 
said : 

We  want  to  make  the  influence  of  the  county  society  so  strong  that 
no  decent,  self-respecting  physician  can  be  without  its  portals.  We 
want  to  make  its  local  influence  so  great  that  no  legislator  can  ignore 
its  warnings,  and  when  we  ask  in  the  name  of  humanity  that  certain 
laws  be  enacted  for  the  general  good  they  will  heed  our  demands  and 
be  only  ready  to  do  our  commands. 

From  the  remarks  of  Dr.  H.  A.  Beaudoux,  president  of  the 
North  Dakota  State  Medical  Association,  at  the  twenty-second 
annual  session  of  the  same,  held  at  Fargo,  May,  1909,  and  pub- 
lished in  the  Journal  of  the  American  Medical  Association,  June 
5,  1009: 

"\Yt>  nre  better  equipped  to  pass  sane  and  important  legislation  than 
any  other  body  of  men  and  to  make  ourselves  felt  In  public  matters 
owing  to  our  intimate  relations,  as  family  physicians  and  advisers,  with 
the  voters  throughout  the  State. 

tt  seems  that  Prof.  Irving  Fisher,  who  was  chairman  of  the 
committee  of  one  hundred,  must  have  had  some  doubt  of  the 
sincerity  and  unselfish  humanitariaiiism  of  the  American  Med- 
ical Association,  for  in  Dr.  McCormack's  report  of  the  executive 
committee,  June,  1910,  at  St.  Louis,  he  has  this  to  say  about  the 
professor : 

I  was  impressed  at  the  outset  of  our  acquaintance  that  he  had  not 
seen  the  best  side  of  our  profession  and  had  some  of  the  prejudices, 
only  more  frankly  expressed,  of  the  average- layman  as  to  its  aims  and 
attainments ;  and  asked  him  to  make  the  same  careful  study  of  its 
plans  of  organizations  and  purposes  that  he  had  given  to  other  problems, 
with  the  result  that  he  soon  became  one  of  our  niusi  appreciated 
friends. 

Of  Senator  OWEN  he  writes: 

Soon  another  great  layman,  Senator  ROBERT  L.  OWEN,  of  Oklahoma, 
entered  the  lists  as  our  official  advocate  in  the  National  Senate.  *  *  * 
It  has  been  one  of  the  greatest  privileges  of  my  life  to  be  intimately 
associated  with  these  two  lay  friends  of  ours,  OWEN  and  Fisher,  etc. 

Sometimes  some  more  conservative  counsels  intervened,  but 
they  were  promptly  suppressed.  At  a  council  of  the  associa- 
tion an  attempt  was  made  by  one  of  their  number  to  check  the 
political  activities  of  the  organization,  but  it  was  a  melancholy 
failure.  The  following  account  of  it  appeared  in  the  Illinois 
Medical  Journal  of  March,  1912 : 

Dr.  Henry  B.  Favill,  of  Chicago,  presided  and  uttered  an  address 
which  was  quite  remarkable,  and  led  up  to  the  most  dramatic  climax 
it  has  ever  been  our  privilege  to  witness.  Dr.  Favill's  remarks  were 
to  the  effect  that  the  activities  of  the  profession  in  political  matters 
had  brought  about  considerable  criticism  from  a  portion  of  the  public. 
We  had  been  accused  among  other  things  of  being  "  a  professional 
trust,"  of  using  "  trade-union  methods,"  etc.  Because  of  these  disa- 
greeable statements  Dr.  Favill  thought  it  the  part  of  wisdom  to  at  once 
abandon  our  efforts  along  political  lines  and  depend  altogether  on  our 
efforts  to  educate  the  people. 

THE   DKAMATIC    CLIMAX. 

Scarcely  had  the  chairman  taken  his  seat,  ready  to  call  for  the  next 
order  of  business,  when  Dr.  J.  M.  McOormack,  of  Kentucky,  sprang  to 
his  feet,  and  in  eloquent  language  called  attention  to  the  stand  taken 
by  the  parent  organization  at  the  Los  Angeles  meeting.  The  repre- 
sentatives of  the  organized  profession,  duly  elected  and  clothed  with 
plenary  power,  had  pledged  the  organization  at  its  annual  meeting  to 
a  continuation  of  the  contest  which  it  had  commenced,  and  instructed 
41917—10969 


48 

Its  committees  and  its  journal  to  use  their  utmost  endeavors  to  pro- 
cure the  passage  of  the  Owen  bill.  If  it  should  go  out  to  the  public 
that  this  conference,  after  all  that  had  been  said  and  done,  had  to-day 
taken  a  different  stand,  and  should  by  its  silence  give  consent  to  the 
doctrinaire  sentiments  of  the  chairman,  a  blow  would  be  struck  at  the 
good  faith  of  the  profession  from  which  it  would  never  recover.  Mr. 
OWEX,  who  had  taken  his  life  and  his  political  fortune  in  his  hands  in 
advocating  our  cause,  would  go  down  to  a  disgraceful  defeat,  and  the 
blood  of  this  sacrifice  would  be  on  our  hands. 

It  has  been  tlie  studied  effort  of  the  American  Medical  Asso- 
ciation to  secure  teachers,  particularly  in  the  public  schools,  to 
cooperate  with  them.  In  this  way  they  could  reach  the  young 
people  and  bring  them  under  their  influence,  'thereby  securing 
the  influence  of  the  teachers  themselves  as  affecting  public 
sentiment.  Dr.  McCormack,  who  was  the  leading  spirit  in  all 
efforts  to  extend  their  organization  and  increase  its  strength 
and  influence,  had  this  to  say  on  that  subject  at  the  Atlantic 
City  session  ia  June,  1909: 

I  am  constantly  impressed  with  the  possibilities  of  this  work  before 
educational  bodies  and  schools,  and  especially  in  institutions  which  are 
engaged  in  preparing  teachers,  editors,  lawyers,  clergymen,  and  other 
leaders  of  public  opinion  for  their  life  work.  The  popular  distrust  of 
the  profession,  ordinarily  passive  but  ready  to  become  active  and  to  be 
utilized  by  the  various  quack  and  other  antagonistic  interests,  can 
scarcely  be  overestimated,  and  probably  can  never  be  eradicated  from 
the  once  infected  adult  mind.  The  experience  of  recent  years  has 
convinced  me  that  with  the  aid  of  the  teachers  and  schools,  an  aid 
which  will  be  curs  for  the  asking  anywhere,  a  generation  of  voters  and 
legislators  can  soon  be  so  trained  that  the  vast"  interests  represented  by 
preventive  medicine  will  come  to  be  appreciated  as  among  the  most 
important  and  cheaply  and  easily  conserved  of  the  Nation's  resources, 
the  unselfish  aims  and  purposes  of  the  profession  will  be  recognized,  and 
constructive  statesmanship  can  be  submitted  for  the  time-serving  po- 
litical methods  which  have  so  long  obtained  in  our  public  affairs,  local. 
State,  and  National.  For  these  and  other  reasons  which  can  not  be 
enlarged  on  here,  I  would  urge  such  an  alliance  between  physicians  and 
teachers  in  every  section  of  the  country  as  will  make  all  that  it  in- 
volves in  our  work  matters  of  common  knowledge.  In  short,  the  future, 
as  I  see  It,  was  never  so  full  of  promise,  if  the  people  can  be  frankly 
taken  into  our  confidence  and  more  sense  and  greater  dignity  can  be 
made  to  obtain  in  our  relations  with  the  public  and  public  affairs. 

The  doctor  seemed  to  be  impressed  with  the  idea,  evidently 
well  founded,  that  the  doctors  composing  the  organization  are 
not  in  public  favor.  He  seemed  to  think  that  an  alliance  with  a 
respectable  body  like  the  teachers  would  relieve  them  from  this 
feeling  of  distrust.  Unfortunately,  too  many  teachers  have 
unwittingly  been  made  the  instruments  of  the  association  for 
such  a  purpose. 

The  following  article  entitled  "The  county  board  of  health," 
by  Dr.  W.  S.  Rankin,  secretary  of  the  State  board  of  health  of 
Raleigh,  N.  C.,  shows  something  of  the  length  to  which  they  are 
going  in  the  effort  to  mold  public  sentiment  and  secure  outside 
help: 

EDUCATIONAL  WORK. 

Here  Is  a  vast  field  of  unlimited  possibilities  wherein  the  board  of 
health  may  do  its  most  important  work. 

The  educational  efforts  of  the  board  of  health  have  three  possible 
agencies  through  which  to  find  expression,  the  public  school,  the  pulpit, 
and  the  press. 

The  receptive  and  pliable  mind  of  developing  citizenship  Is  the  most 
prolific  soil  in  which  to  sow  the  seed  of  sanitary  regeneration.  Cer- 
tainly there  is  nothing  more  vital  to  the  future  welfare  of  all  the 
people  than  that  our  school  children  shall  be  taught  the  value  of 
health,  that  it  is  fundamental  to  all  other  possessions,  and  that  it  is  a 
t'jing  that  can  be  easily  conserved  or  easily  wasted.  There  is  a  law 
41917—10969 


49 

that  requires  our  public  schools  to  teach  Ritchie's  Primer  of  Sanitation 
to  all  pupils  in  the  seventh  grade.  County  boards  of  health  should  see 
to  it  that  this  law  is  rigidly  observed. 

In  the  December  Bulletin  we  suggested  the  purchase  hy  the  county 
of  an  acetylene  lantern  ami  slides.  The  entire  outfit  can  be  obtained 
for  $100.  "if  the  county  board  of  health  would  Invite  the  cooperation  of 
the  county  medical  society  and  work  out  with  that  organization  a 
program  of  lectures  to  be  given  by  the  members  of  the  county  medical 
society  to  the  various  public  schools  in  the  county,  nothing  would  go 
further  in  aronsing  the  sanitary  conscience  of  the  county.  The  lectures 
should  be  given  at  night  in  tbe  public  schoolhouses.  A  week  preceding 
the  lecture  the  county  superintendent  of  schools  should  forward  to  the 
teacher  of  the  school  a  quantity  of  hano*bills  announcing  the  lecture, 
and  these  could  he  distributed  through  the  school  children  throughout 
the  community.  If  the  county  mediciaj  society  does  not  care  itself  to 
prepare  a  set  of  standard  lectures  on  important  sanitary  subjects,  the 
State  board  of  health  will  be  very  glad  to  furnish  these  lectures  already 
prepared,  so  that  little  time  will  need  to  he  given  the  matter  by  the 
individual  members  of  the  county  medicial  society.  For  fuller  detail 
in  regard  to  this  plan  see  313  of  the  December  (1911)  Bulletin. 

Another  very  effective  method  for  emphasizing  the  importance  of  the 
study  of  sanitation  in  the  schools  and  for  securing  the  interest  of  the 
children,  and  one  that  has  been  put  to  extensive  use  by  many  progress- 
ive communities,  is  the  offering  of  prizes  for  compositions  on  public 
health  subjects.  Asheville,  Wilmington,  and  Smithfleld,  among  other 
towns  in  North  Carolina,  have  adopted  this  idea.  A  county  in  Alabama 
obtained  such  splendid  results  in  increasing  the  interest  of  the  people 
in  matters  of  sanitation  through  a  series  of  prizes  offered  in  the  public 
schools  of  the  coxurty  for  compositions  on  tuberculosis,  sanitation,  flies, 
etc..  as  to  have  attracted  national  attention.  What  has  been,  done  iu 
Alabama  can  be  done  in  North  Carolina, 

*••*••• 

The  county  medical  society  should  nse  Its  influence  with  the  news- 
papers of  their  county  to  secure  the  publication  of  articles  bearing  upon 
public  health.  The  newspapers  of  North  Carolina  recognize  the  im- 
portance of  this  public  opinion  and  are  lending  the  use  of  their  columns 
unstintedly  for  the  promotion  of  public  health.  County  beards  of  health 
should  keep  the  editor  of  the  county  paper  informed  in  regard  to  local 
conditions  and  events  that  affect  the  public  health.  The  State  board 
of  health  prepares  weekly  newspaper  articles  on  the  subject  of  public 
health  and  sends  them  to  all  the  newspapers  of  the  State.  If  your 
county  paper  has  not  been  publishing  some  of  these  articles,  the  board 
of  health  might  call  attention  to  the  possible  oversight  and  use  its 
influence  in  securing  more  frequent  references  to  this  matter,  which 
should  deeply  concern  the  public. 

Mr.  President,  the  full  title  of  Ritchie's  primer,  referred  to  -fn 
the  last  article,  is  "  Primer  of  sanitation :  Being  a  simple  work 
on  disease  germs  and  how  to  fight  them."  And  the  following 
are  the  subjects  treated  in  this  so-called  work  on  sanitation: 

Why  the  study  of  disease  germs  is  important. 
The  cells  of  the  body. 

Disease  germs  and  how  they  get  into  the  body. 
The  struggle  between  the  body  and  the  germs. 
Bacteria. 
The  skin. 

The  pus-forming  bacteria. 
Tetanus    (lockjaw). 
The  air  passages  and  the  lungs. 
Diphtheria. 
Pneumonia. 

Influenza,  whooping  cough,   and  colds. 
Tuberculosis. 

The  treatment  of  consumption, 
Disease  germs   in  dust. 
The  alimentary  .canal. 
Typhoid  fever. 

Diseases  caused  by  relatives  of  the  typhoid  germ. 
Other  bacterial  diseases  of  the  intestines. 
Disease  germs  in  water. 
Other  bacterial  disedses. 
Protozoa. 

Malarial  fever  and  yellow  fever. 
41917— 109G9— — 4 


50 

Mosquitoes. 

Smallpox. 

Other  protozoan  diseases. 

Intestinal  worms. 

The  importance  of  sanitation. 

The  housefly. 

Disease  germs  in  food. 

Disinfection. 

Unhygienic  habits. 

Public  sanitation. 

What  governments  can  do  to  preserve  the  public  health. 

Practical  sanitation. 

This  is  the  kind  of  reading  that  is  being  offered  to  the  chil- 
dren of  the  country  and  attempted  to  be  forced  upon  them,  for 
the  study  of  the  book  has  already  been  made  compulsory  in 
the  State  of  North  Carolina  and,  I  understand,  in  some  other 
States. 

There  has  been  much  complaint  that  the  earnings  of  the 
doctors  have  been  falling  off.  Hence  the  extraordinary  efforts 
through  political  means  and  unjust  restrictive  legislation  to  re- 
trieve their  fortunes.  At  the  meeting  of  the  San  Francisco 
Medical  Society  in  January,  1899,  Dr.  Charles  G.  Kuhlmau  read 
a  paper  in  which  he  showed  that  the  average  earning  capacity 
of  California's  3,000  doctors  should  be  $5,000  each  per  annum, 
but  because  "irregular"  physicians  were  allowed  to  practice 
and  of  bad  debts  it  was  only  $850,  or  one-sixth  of  what  it  should 
be,  entailing  a  loss  to  the  "  regular  "  doctors  of  that  State  alone 
of  $10,000,000  per  annum. 

That  was  certainly  a  bad  showing  for  the  regulars.  He  urged 
as  a  remedy  "  a  better  organization  of  the  medical  profession 
into  a  distinct  corporation  and  which  should  be,  to  be  perfect 
in  its  results,  not  merely  local  or  State  but  national  in  its  char- 
acter." The  doctor's  advice  was  taken.  Now  the  regulars  have 
just  such  an  organization  as  he  hoped  for,  and  it  has  not  hesi- 
tated to  use  every  means  within  its  reach,  political  and  other- 
wise, to  circumvent  the  irregulars  and  put  them  out  of  business. 
To  this  end  they  have  spent  millions  of  dollars,  and  the  people 
are  no  better  off,  nor  have  the  regulars  increased  their  earning 
capacity  or  increased  for  themselves  the  public  respect  or  con- 
fidence. Their  case  is  no  better,  but  seemingly  worse,  than  it 
was  before,  as  indicated  by  the  following  extract  from  the  New 
York  State  Journal  of  Medicine  of  March  12,  1910: 

The  profession  has  not  fared  well  at  the  hands  of  legislators.  The 
legislation  secured  to  elevate  the  standard  of  the  profession  and  protect 
the  public  from  quacks  has  resulted,  with  the  help  of  the  same  legis- 
latures, in  turning  turkish-bath  rubbers  into  doctors,  and  the  optician 
Las  succeeded  in  usurping  some  of  the  most  delicate  functions  of  the 
physician.  If  the  legislature  continues  to  license  successive  schools  of 
quackery,  we  may  well  question  the  wisdom  of  State  control  of  license 
to  practice  medicine.  On  account  of  this  and  on  account  of  the  general 
education  in  hygiene  and  preventive  medicine,  the  income  of  the  pro- 
fession has  been  greatly  diminished.  The  remedy  would  he  to  increase 
the  fees,  but  this  could  not  be  effected  without  thorough  organization 
and  loyalty  to  each  other  on  the  part  of  the  doctors.  The  New  York 
Journal  says,  further,  that  it  is  the  universal  opinion  that  an  agreement 
in  regard  to  fees  would  not  be  respected,  and  that  this  assertion  is 
striking  proof  that  there  is  real  distress  in  our  ranjcs  and  that  medi- 
cine is  degenerating  into  a  vulgar  game  of  grab  or  sordid  struggle  for 
mere  existence. 

Thks  shows  a   very  distressing  condition  of  things  for  the 

regulars;  but  it  never  seems  to  occur  to  them  that  the  error 

mny  be  with  them.     It  is  inconceivable  to  them  that  they  could 

by   any   possibility   be   "  irregular "   and   some  other   mode  of 

41817— 109GO 


51 

healing  the  true  or  even  a  better  one  than  theirs.  It  is  not 
theirs  to  learn,  but  to  stick  dogmatically  to  the  contention  that 
no  one  can  be  right  but  them.  Otlier  people  hare  seen  their 
error  and  the  falsity  of  their  ideas  of  healing,  but  they  seem 
incapable  of  appreciating  a  patent  fact  that  millions  of  people 
have  learned  to  their  inestimable  advantage. 

Mr.  President,  there  is  still  another  side  of  this  important 
question  that  should  not  be  allowed  to  escape  the  attention  of 
the  Senate.  It  is  this:  I  have  already  pointed  out  that  tke 
medical  activity  of  the  Government  in  all  its  branches  is  in  the 
hands  of  and  completely  under  the  influence  and  control  of  one 
school  of  medicine,  and  every  publication  sent  out  as  informa- 
tion coming  from  the  National  Government  is  now,  and  will 
continue  to  be  under  this  bill,  the  views  of  one  school  of  medi- 
cine, and  that  a  school  which  has  been  largely  discredited. 
When  the  Government  becomes  the  publisher  and  distributor  of 
information  obtained  by  and  relating  to  this  school  of  medicine, 
it  establishes  a  State  medicine  and  makes  it  strictly  sectarian. 
This  is  bound  to  continue  just  so  long  as  one  school  of  medicine 
is  intrusted  with  the  management  of  health  matters.  It  may- 
be said  that  this  bill  provides  against  discrimination  as  between 
different,  schools  of  medicine.  But  while  the  bureau  is  under 
the  control  of  one  school  and  no  physician  or  surgeon  of  any 
other  school  is  employed  by  the  Government,  such  a  provision 
amounts  to  nothing.  The  Government  has  maintained  this  sec- 
tarianism in  medicine  for  over  40  years.  Its  health  activities 
have  been  completely  dominated  by  one  sect  to  the  exclusion  of 
all  others. 

The  Government  has  no  more  right  to  sanction  or  support 
sectarianism  in  medicine  than  in  religion.  One  is  just  as  ranch 
of  a  violation  of  the  freedom  of  the  citizen  as  the  other.  There 
are  millions  of  people  in  this  country  who  believe  in  the  homeo- 
pathic and  eclectic  modes  of  healing,  and  millions  more  who  do 
not  believe  in  drug  healing  of  any  kind.  But  not  one  of  these 
has  any  recognition  whatever  by  the  Government  as  represented 
by  the  present  medical  bureaus,  nor  will  they  have  under  this 
bill  if  it  becomes  a  law. 

By  these  publications  the  Government  is  simply  promoting 
the  views  of  one  school  of  medicine  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others. 
And  worse  still,  they  are  not  a  report  of  established  or  known 
facts,  but  of  mere  opinions  opposed  to  the  views  of  other  equally 
competent  schools  of  medicine,  and  generally  found  in  the  end 
to  be  erroneous.  Such  a  publicity  burean  shuts  out  the  views, 
opinions,  investigations,  and  discoveries  of  every  other  school 
of  medicine,  composed,  in  part,  of  some  of  the  ablest  men  and 
brightest  minds  in  the  country.  If  we  take  the  publications  of 
the  present  health  bureaus,  and  the  people  of  this  country  were 
dependent  upon  them  for  their  information,  they  would  never 
know  that  a  homeopathic,  eclectic,  or  any  other  school  of  medi- 
cine or  healing  existed.  And  if  the  bureaus  should  speak  on  the 
subject,  it  would  be  to  discredit  any  school  but  the  one.  If  such 
publications  are  of  any  use  to  the  public,  they  should  be  made 
nousectarian  and  inform  the  people  of  every  discovery,  advance, 
or  change  in  health  affairs  from  whatever  source  and  without 
bias  or  prejudice. 

This  could  never  be  expected  from  present  bureaus  or  any 
consolidation  of  them.  The  chief  reason  is  that  this  legislation 
41917 — 109G9 


52 

is  sought  by  and  in  the  interest  of  one  school  of  medicine.  No 
other  school  is  asking  for  or  favors  it.  The  people  do  not  ask 
for  it  and  do  not  understand  it. 

SEBUM    THERAPY. 

Mr.  President,  the  old  school  of  medicine  has  now  taken  up 
the  idea  of  serum  therapy,  so  called,  or  the  prevention  of 
disease  by  inoculation  of  supposed  disease-preventing  serums 
extracted  from  diseased  animals.  In  the  case  of  smallpox  we 
have  had  this  alleged  preventive  for  many  years.  The  efficacy 
of  vaccination  has  never  been  proved.  It  has  from  the  be- 
ginning been  stoutly  denied,  and  ample  proof  has  been  given 
tiiat  it  is  not  a  preventive,  notwithstanding  the  National  Gov- 
ernment, and  State,  county,  and  city  authorities  compel  the 
people,  including  young  children,  to  submit  to  the  poisoning  of 
their  blood  by  this  loathsome  treatment.  The  National  Gov- 
ernment forces  it  upon  its  soldiers  and  sailors  by  the  strictest 
penalties.  Children  whose  parents  are  opposed  to  it  are  denied 
school  privileges,  and  other  penalties  are  imposed  to  compel 
submission  to  vaccination,  whether  the  people  want  it  or  not. 
It  is  almost  beyond  belief  that  any  enlightened  Government  would 
thus  trespass  upon  the  liberties  and  personal  rights  of  its  citizens 
in  such  ways  upon  the  mere  opinion  of  doctors,  and  opinions 
that  have  never  been  substantiated,  but  have  been  discredited  and 
disproved  over  and  over  again.  And  now  the  doctors  say 
typhoid  fever  can  be  prevented  by  a  serum  that  has  been  dis- 
covered lately,  and  the  Government  at  once  accepts  this  opinion 
and  forces  it  upon  its  soldiers,  sailors,  and  employees.  Then 
the  school  children  will  be  forced  to  accept  this  new  and  equally 
dangerous  system  of  poisoning.  Like  remedies  are  being  dis- 
covered for  other  diseases,  until  everybody  will  have  to  submit 
to  have  his  body  inoculated  with  various  poisons,  on  the  theory 
that  he  will  thus  be  made  immune  from  every  known  disease. 
The  whole  thing  is  too  absurd  to  talk  about.  It  results  from 
the  fact  that  the  doctors  have  learned  that  the  old  remedies 
will  neither  prevent  nor  heal  disease,  and  they  are  losing  their 
business  and  public  confidence.  The  administration  of  these 
pretended  preventive  remedies  is  a  very  lucrative  business,  and 
when  people  are  compelled  to  take  them  it  is  easy  to  get 
patients. 

The  practice  of  vaccination  is  condemned  by  physicians  and 
scientists  and  all  classes  of  people.  The  following  from  the  late 
Moncure  D.  Conway,  one  of  the  great  men  of  this  country,  illus- 
trates what  men  of  learning  and  information  think  about  it : 

A  considerable  number  of  good  people  are  just  now  suffering  fines  and 
Imprisonments  because  they  will  not  suffer  their  children  to  be  vacci- 
nated. Their  very  excellencies  as  parents  cause  them  to  be  dealt  with 
as  malefactors.  Here,  say,  are  two  men  :  One  gives  uninf>uiriug  assent 
to  what  other  thoughtless  people  assent  to ;  he  doesn't  care  much  what 
happens  to  his  child,  delegates  to  usage  the  duty  of  thinking  for  it, 
gives  it  up  to  be  baptised,  catechised,  vaccinated.  Hogged  at  school— to 
anything  that  is  usual,  whether  right  or  not.  The  other  man  gives  no 
uninquiring  assent ;  he  studies  carefully  that  his  family  may  be  nour- 
ished with  truth  and  maintained  by  such  laws  of  health  as  he  can  dis- 
cover. Now,  of  these  two  the  careless  parent  is  favored  by  the  vacci- 
nation law,  while  the  thoughtful,  anxious,  and  devoted  parent  is  pun- 
ished unless  lie  adopt  a  prescribed  opinion.  A  law  which  thus  favors 
parental  indifference  and  discourages  careful  thought  and  conscientious 
devotion  to  the  chlFQ's  welfare  reverses  the  spirit  of  all  just  laws.  Of 
course  it  is  equally  probable  that  the  thinking  parent  may  be  able  to 
agree  with  the  majority ;  but  he  may  not,  and  in  this  case  he  suffers 
41917—10969 


53 

for  bis  inquiry,  while  the  other  escapes — no  man  being  so  sare  rrom  the 
results  of  thought,  erroneous  or  right,  as  he  who  never  'thinks  at  all. 

Vaccination  has  been  seriously  challenged  by  men  of  learning.  The 
misgivings  concerning  it  have  not  arisen  from  ignorance  and  prejudice, 
but  from  men  of  science  and  medical  men.  These  arguments  have  been 
sufficiently  strong  to  shake  the  convictions  of  eminent  thinkers  and 
political  leaders— such  as  Herbert  Spencer.  Prof.  F.  W.  Newman.  Dr. 
Garth  Wilkinson,  William  Ewart  Gladstone,  W.  E.  Forster,  John 
Bright — in  the  justice  of  the  law.  and  of  some  of  them  in  vaccination 
itself.  The  arguments  which  have  influenced  such  men — leaders  ot 
large  numbers  of  people- — can  not  be  met  justly  except  by  fact  and  argu- 
ment. To  answer  by  mere  force  is  tyranny.  The  reasoning  objectors 
have  been  answered  only  by  fine  and  imprisonment,  which  are  as  gen- 
uinely persecutions  as  if  inflicted  for  the  nonbaptism  of  children,  on  the 
ground  that  such  children  may  become  foci  of  heretical  infection.  To 
those  who  dissent  from  it  vaccination  is  merely  a  medical  dogma.  To 
coerce  parents  into  its  practice  rests  upon  that  assumption  of  medical 
infallibility  which  has  again  and  again  been  proved  false,  as  in  the 
instance  of  inoculation,  once  generally  practiced,  now  penal ;  as  in  the 
example  of  bleeding,  that  barbarous  practice  to  which  Washington  and 
Cavour  fell  victims  while  opening  new  vistas  of  civilization.  Even 
were  physicians  unanimous  in  their  faith  in  vaccination,  they  could  not 
claim  infallibility  after  having  so  often  erred,  while,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  there  is  less  unanimity  in  that  profession  about  vaccination  than 
there  was  at  one  time  in  favor  of  the  now  discredited  inoculation. 

And  tliis  is  the  way  the  Government  punishes  its  citizens  for 
presuming  to  deny  the  right  of  its  officers  to  poison  their  blood 
by  this  process: 

[From  the  St.  Lonls  Post-Dispatch.] 

MEDICAL,    TTRAXXY    IJf    NAVT. 

Resistance  to  the  advice  and  Instructions  of  medical  officers  In  the 
Army  or  Navy  is  construed  as  insubordination  as  serious  as  resistance 
to  the  orders  of  other  commissioned  officers.  Because  they  refused  to 
submit  themselves  to  the  new  antityphoid  inoculation,  a  number  of  the 
crew  of  the  battleship  Vermont,  in  Cuban  waters,  are  being  punished 
as  virtual  mutineers. 

There  was  a  time  when  disobedience  to  tne  orders  of  a  chaplain 
Involved  as  grave  consequence_s  to  members  of  the  organized  military 
forces.  Army  and  Nary  policies  which  make  mutineers  of  faithful 
men  with  intelligence  and  individuality  enough  to  object  to  the  intro- 
duction of  noisome,  poisonous  substances  into  healthy  bodies  can  not 
commaad  popular  approTak 

If  vaccinations  for  various  diseases  were  prescribed  a  condition  at 
the  time  of  enlistment,  the  men  would  have  the  option  of  consenting 
to  it  or  declining  to  enter  the  service.  To  impose  after  enlistment 
vaccination  on  men  in  violation  of  their  will  and  judgment  is  a  misuse 
of  military  authority.  It  can  not  be  justified  on  the  ground  of  neces- 
sity in  the  absence  of  an  epidemic.  So  far  as  typhoid  is  concerned,  it 
can  be  combated  in  entirely  unobjectionable  ways  through  sanitation. 

This  is  a  subject  with  which  Congress  should  deal. 

When  one  conies  to  consider  this  subject,  the  evidences  against 
its  compulsory  imposition  are  so  numerous  that  one  can  select 
but  few  of  them  for  use  in  an  address  of  this  kind.  No  one 
can  truthfully  deny  that  thousands  of  lives,  many  of  them  of 
little  children,  have  been  sacrificed  to  this  vile  practice.  But, 
again,  the  people  do  not  or  will  not  think  for  themselves.  To 
them  the  opinion  of  some  doctor  who  knows  no  more  than  they 
do  about  it  is  sufficient  and  they  go  no  farther.  Those  who  do 
think  for  themselves  and  refuse  to  submit  to  the  treatment  for 
their  children  must  lose  their  right  to  send  them  to  the  public 
schools.  If  the  doctors  agreed  abont  it.  it  would  not  be  so  bad. 
But  they  do  not  Many  of  the  ablest  doctors  of  all  times  since 
it  came  into  use  have  denied  that  k  is  of  any  value  and  assert 
that  it  is  n  most  dangerous  remedy.  In  an  appeal  to  the  people 
of  Pennsylvania  by  certain  inhabitants  of  Baugor,  Northampton 
County,  they  say: 

The  inhabitants  of  Bangor,  Northampton  County,  in  public  meeting 
assembled,  on  Friday  evening,  March  29,  1907,  issue  this  appeal  to  the 
1,1917—10969 


54 

people  of  Pennsylvania  TO  Join  with  them  in  restoring  the  principles  of 
civil  liberty  in  this  Commonwealth,  which  have  been  outraged  by  the 
enforcement  of  the  compulsory  vaccination  laws. 

On  November  5  last,  one  of  the  brightest  and  best  of  children, 
Hershel,  the  8-year-old  SOD  of  Frank  N.  Love,  a  respected  citizen  of 
Bangor,  was  vaccinated  in  order  to  obtain  admission  to  school,  as  re- 
quired by  the  12th  section  of  the  act  of  June  18,  1805.  Within  17  days 
he  was  dead,  after  suffering  what  no  tongue  can  tell.  The  poison,  was 
put  into  his  little  body,  but  the  doctors  could  not  get  It  out. 

The  father  and  mother  of  this  victim  of  State-enforced  blood  poison- 
Ing  have  one  remaining  child,  a  little  girt,  who  is  now  of  school  age. 
But  a  cruel  law,  which  still  remains  unrepealed  upon  the  statute  books 
of  this  State,  denies  to  this  child  the  right  of  education  guaranteed  by 
our  Constitution,  unless  her  already  griei-stricken  parents  again  make  a 
sacrifice  to  tiie  Moloch  of  vacclnation. 

•  •••••• 

The  tendency  of  vaccination  to  spread  smallpox  and  its  worth lessness 
AS  a  preventive  have  been  illustrated  in  our  own  State,  where  the  dis- 
ease has  been  most  prevalent  and  fatal  In  those  localities  where  vacci- 
nation has  been  general.  In  Philadelphia  during  the  10  years  imme- 
diately preceding  the  enforcement  of  the  vaccination  school  law,  from 
1885  to  1894,  there  were  113  deaths  from  smallpox,  while  during  the 
four  years  from  1901  to  1904,  when  the  law  was  being  strictly  en- 
forced, there  died  tn  the  Municipal  Hospital  of  smallpox  7GO  persons. 
It  i&  estimated  that  the  vaccinations  performed  during  that  outbreak 
were  about  500,000  In  number.  In  Marietta,  where  vaccine  is  manu- 
factured from  the  virus  of  smallpox,  there  were  more  than  50  cases  in 
1905.  But  in  Erie,  where  it  has  been  found  impossible  to  enforce  vac- 
cination, there  has  been  only  one  death  from  smallpox  in  25  years,  and 
in  Wayncsboro,  where  the  entire  population  is  opposed  to  vaccination, 
there  has  not  been  a  case  of  smallpox  since  the  Civil  War,  nor  a  death 
from  that  disease  for  G4  years. 

The  spread  of  smallpox  is,  however,  one  ot  the  least  of  the  evils 
Chargeable  against  vaccination,  for  physicians  who  have  independently 
investigated  the  subject  tell  us  that  the  words  of  Scripture,  that  "  The 
life  of  all  flesh  is  the  blood  thereof,"  are  literally  true,  and  (hat  the  cor- 
ruption of  the  blood  defiles  the  fountain  of  life,  making  disease  neces- 
sary to  purify  the  system  and  prevent  degeneration.  Vaccination  stands 
indicted  by  the  common  sense  of  mankind,  the  teachings  of  religion,  and 
the  voices  of  the  world's  greatest  scientists  and  sanitarians,  including 
Alexander  von  Humbolclt,  Florence  Nightingale,  John  1'ickering,  Sir 
William  J.  Collins,  Herbert  Spencer,  Alfred  Russel  Wallace,  Alexander 
Milton  Ross,  Montague  R.  Level-son,  Charles  Creighton,  Edgar  M.  Crook- 
shank,  and  many  others  of  like  eminence.  It  has  poisoned  the  blood  of 
countless  multitudes  and  placed  upon  its  victims  the  stamp  of  consump- 
tion, syphilis,  cancer,  and  many  other  terrible  diseases. 

»•»**»• 

If  the  functions  of  government  were  strictly  limited  to  the  exercise 
of  its  just  powers,  grounded  in  nature,  and  derived  from  the  consent  of 
the  governed,  and  if  all  arbitrary  authority  were  abolished,  there  would 
be  no  compulsory  vaccination  laws,  and  the  history  of  Pennsylvania 
during  the  last  two  years  would  not  have  been  sullied  by  the  slaughter 
of  Dale  lams,  of  Washington  County ;  Lottie  Bentzel,  of  Cumberland 
County ;  George  Baker,  of  York  County,  John  L.  Hilt,  of  Lancaster 
County,  Beatrice  Bausonville,  of  Pittsburgh,  and  many  other  little  inno- 
cents by  State-enforced  blood  poisoning. 

The  attitude  of  certain  political  doctors  who  arc  members  of  the 
legislature  in  presuming  to  dictate  to  more  than  6,000,000  people  in 
this  Commonwealth  concerning  their  own  flesh  and  blood,  encouraged  as 
it  has  been  by  the  attempt  of  health  officials  to  use  the  power  and  pat- 
ronage of  their  offices  to  influence  the  course  of  legislation,  we  denounce 
as  being  opposed  to  the  spirit  of  our  institutions. 

•  **»••• 

When  a  few  political  doctors,  animated  by  the  selfish  and  Infamous 
desire  of  a  clique  in  the  medical  profession  to  increase  its  profits  by 
diseasing  the  entire  population  of  this  State,  can  block  the  remedial 
legislation  demanded  by  -an  overwhelming  majority  of  the  people  an 
issue  is  raised  which  must  be  carried  to  every  hamlet  and  fireside.  Shall 
a  politico-medical  oligarchy,  supported  by  the  public  revenues,  be  per- 
mitted to  compel  any  person  to  submit  to  a  surgical  operation,  or  shall 
the  free  institutions  guaranteed  by  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
be  maintained  in  this  Commonwealth?  Shall  a  union  of  medicine  and 
State  be  permitted  to  enslave  the  bodies  of  men,  women,  and  children 
in  a  community  in  which  the  principle's  of  religious  liberty  and  tolera- 
tion have  been  upheld  for  two  centuries  and  more? 
41917—10969 


55 

Mr.  J.  P.  McLean  has  this  to  say  in  the  Dayton  (Ohio)  News 
of  October  26,  1910: 

AGAINST    VACCINATION'. 

EDITOR  DAILY  NEWS  :  I  will  avail  myself  of  the  opportunity  of  con- 
tributing an  article  on  "  "Vaccination  "  for  the  reason  that  I  believe  that 
this  cult  is  the  greatest  crime  against  nature  ever  recognized,  and  is  far 
worse  than  war,  famine,  and  pestilence.  One  article  will  not  permit  me 
to  go  into  details,  nor  treat  the  subject  as  I  would  desire.  The  fact  that 
nnti\«accination  societies  are  numerous  in  Great  Britain,  America,  and 
Canada  and  otfoer  countries,  indicates  that  there  is  a  widespread  dissent 
and  opposition  to  the  cult.  If  to  this  be  added  the  names  of  the  great- 
est pathologrsts,  physicians,  surgeons,  naturalists,  statesmen,  etc., 
then  it  is  well  to  panse  and  consider.  I  will  here  confine  myself  to  some 
of  the  reasons  why  the  ranks  of  the  opposition,  are  extending,  though  I 
may  not  follow  the  natural  eegnenee. 

In  all  probability  the  opposition  to  the  cult  arises  principally  from 
the  fact  that  it  is  a  propagator  of  a  fataj  disease.  This  point  is  easily 
proven  from  the  fact  "  that  all  lymph,  however  pellucid,  does  really 
contain  blood  cells."  (Unanimous  opinion  of  the  Royal  Commission  on 
Vaccinations,  final  report,  p.  112.)  If,  then,  vaccine  matter  always  con- 
tains blood  cells,  then  whatever  disease  the  source  of  the  suppfy  may 
have,  will  be  propagated  in  the  victim.  Dr.  Alexander  Wilder,  the  mos't 
brilliant  and  versatile  physician  America  ever  produced,  says:  "Con- 
sumption follows  in  the  footsteps  of  vaccination  as  directly  as  an  effect 
ever  follows  a  cause.  The  vaccine  poison  being  the  product  of  decaying 
animal  tissue,  and  often  tuberculosis  in  character,  must  naturally  pro- 
duce its  like  wherever  it  finds  the  suitable  opportunity."  (Sec  his""  Fal- 
lacy of  Va-cclnation,"  p.  13.)  He  quotes  from  Prof.  Bartlett,  of  the 
medicine  department  of  the  University  of  New  York,  who  stated  that 
"  in  2O8  children  who  had  been  vaccinated.  88  died  of  tubercular  con- 
sumption and  170  of  other  maladies.  In  05  who  were  not  vaccinated 
80  only  died  of  consumption  and  03  of  other  diseases." 

The  Medical  Times  and  Gazette,  London,  for  January  1,  1854,  called 
attention  to  the  fact  that  consumption  had  widely  spread  since  (he  in- 
troduction of  vaccination.  That  during  the  10  preceding  years  it  had 
slain  08.204  In  the  metropolis  alone.  The  report  of  the  registrar  general 
for  1CG9  gare  the  number  of  deaths  at  53,794  from  the  canse  alone. 
Dr.  Wilder  is  supported  by  such  men  as  St.  Gervais.  Hufelaud,  Hertwig, 
Grisolle,  Constadt,  Bedaur,  who  also  enumerated  about  80  more  diseases. 

Dr.  .Tasuco  Copland  (Dictionary  of  Medicine,  vol.  3,  pp.  140,  141) 
says  :  "  Notwithstanding  the  laudation  bestowed  upon  vaccination.  I  be- 
lieve that  as  the  lapse  of  time  allows  the  fact  to  be  more  fully  demon- 
strated it  will  be  found  to  be  a  not  unfruitful  source  of  scrofula  and 
tuberceles."  Even  Dr.  Felix  von  Niemeyer  says  that  vaccination  in  chil- 
dren may  leave  behind  it  fhe  germs  of  a  disposition  to  consumption 
(p.  22).  He  further  adds:  "I  must  protest  against  unconditional  com- 
pulsory vaccination,  particularly  during  the  Itrst  two  years  of  life."  I 
might  extend  this,  but  enough  has  been  said. 

Cancer  is  another  rapidly  increasing  disease.  Does  any  person  know 
even  of  a  single  case  of  this  disease  in  a  human  being  who  was  never 
vaccinated?  It  5s  a  frightful  disease,  and  fatal.  Several  years  ago 
Dr.  Wilder  wrote  hi  that  of  his  own  knowledge  he  knew  this  disease  to 
be  bovine.  Hntchinson  (Illustrations  of  Classical  Surgery,  vol.  1,  p. 
141)  has  illustrated  a  case  of  lupus  in  and  around  a  vaccination  scar, 
and  cases  of  a  like  nature  have  been  described  by  Besnier  (Annales  of 
Dermatologie  at  de  Syphiligraphie,  vol.  10,  p.  576).  Lennaoder  (Upsala 
Lakareforennings  Forhandlinger.  vol.  25,  pp.  65-70)  ;  and  Colcott  Fox 
(The  Practitioner,  vol.  G,  p.  500). 

Judging  by  reports,  lockjaw  Is  not  uncommon  after  vaccination.  I 
need  only  to  refer  to  the  statements  of  Dr.  J.  H.  Cottman  (New  Or- 
leans Medical  and  Surgical  Journal,  vol.  2.  p.  788),  Dr.  George  Ross 
(The  Southern  Clinic,  vol.  1,  p.  468),  Dr.  Theodore  Dimon  (St.  Louis 
Courier  of  Medicine,  vol.  7,  p.  310),  Dr.  H.  J.  Berkeley  (Maryland  Med- 
ical Journal,  vol.  f>,  p.  241).  Dr.  W.  T.  Bates  (Transactions  of  the 
South  Carolina  Medical  Association,  vol.  32,  p.  1O5),  etc. 

Without  multiplying  the  list  of  diseases  with  accompanying  refer- 
ences, I  will  conclude  this  portion  oi  the  article  by  stating  that  the 
celebrated  physician,  J.  J.  G.  Wilkinson,  gives  a  list  of  50  different  dis- 
eases caused  by  vaccination.  Dr.  Alfred  R.  Wallace,  the  most  eminent 
of  living  naturalists,  estimates  that  vaccination  is  the  annual  cause  of 
10,000  inocular  diseases  In  Great  Britain.  1  presume  the  Dayton 
library  has  his  "  Wonderful  Century."  If  so,  then  read  wh'at  he  says 
on  the  vaccination  delusion. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  well  at  this  point  to  cnll  attention  to  Circular 
147,  issued  June  16,  1909,  by  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  which  re- 
41917 — 10969 


56 

lares  to  the  outbreak  of  the  foot-and-mouth  disease  in  cattle  In  Penn- 
sylvania, Maryland,  and  Michigan  during  November,  1908.  The  origin 
of  the  disease  was  traced  to  2i  heifers  which  had  been  previously  used 
for  the.  production  of  vaccine  virus. 

It  is  believed  that  vaccination  produces  the  soil  for  the  propagation 
of  smallpox.  As  vaccination  is  a  septic  poison,  it  would  not  be  difficult 
to  maintain  this  position. 

Turning  to  the  Brittanica,  ninth  edition,  volume  24,  page  20,  wfi 
read  that  Prussia  was  the  best  vaccinated  cojntry  in  Europe  In  1871, 
yet,  during  the  epidemic  of  that  year  its  mortality  was  higher  (69.S39J 
than  any  other  northern  State ;  that  the  Bavarian  contingent,  which 
was  rcvaccinated  without  exception,  had  five  times  the  death  rate 
from  smallpox  than  thdt  of  the  Bavarian  civil  population :  that  in 
Bavaria  in  1871,  of  30,742  cases  of  smallpox,  29,429  with  3,994  deaths 
had  been  vaccinated ;  that  at  Bromley  in  1S&1  there  was  a  total  of 
43  casen,  including  16  confluent,  all  vaccinated;  that  at  CologHfe  in 
1870  the  first  imvaccinared  person  attacked  by  smallpox  was  the 
one  hundred  and  seventy-fourth  in  order  of  time ;  at  Bonn  the  same 
year  the  forty-second ;  and  at  Liegnity  in  1871  the  two  hundred  and 
twenty-fifth.  Take  the  recent  cases  in  the  United  States  Navy,  where 
all  are  revaccinated.  when  the  armored  cruiser  Washington  was  three 
days  out  (Jan.  22,  1910}  from  Yokohama,  smallpox  broke  out  and 
for  three  days  treated  as  chickenpox.  The  vessel  reached  Honolulu 
on  the  28th  with  three  cases,  one  of  which  proved  fatal.  Here  the 
ship  was  fumigated.  The  vessel  left  February  3,  and  by  the  6th  three 
cases  developed,  and  on  the  14th  arrived  at  Port  Townsend  with  five 
cases,  where  the  patients  were  taken  ashore,  three  of  whom  died.  The 
vessel  was  held  in  quarantine  until  the  22d.  The  vessel  arrived  at 
San  Francisco  on  March  4,  reporting  nine  cases  with  four  deaths. 

By  the  advocates  of  the  cult,  Germany  is  pointed  to  with  pride  from 
heing  free  from  smallpox  on  account  of  her  rijtid  laws  for  vaccination. 
Let  us  see.  Durine;  the  week  ending  July  9,  1910,  in  the  British 
Parliament,  a  question  was  askrd  concerning  a  recent  report  of  small- 
pox in  Germany.  The  Right  Hon.  Sir  John  Burns,  president  of  the 
local  Government  board,  replied  that  in  Prussia  690  cases,  with  107 
deaths,  had  been  notified. 

With  the  imperfect  record  above  set  forth  there  Js  sufficient  evidence 
for  ns  to  believe  with  Lord  Clifton  that  vaccination  is  "  legal  child 
murder,"  or  with  others  who  declare  it  to  be  a  "  ghastly  delusion." 

FRANKLIN,  OHIO,  October  26,  1310. 

Mr.  President,  the  facts  rnd  conditions  are  so  clearly  stated 
in  this  article  and  others  that  I  have  cited,  that  but  little  need 
be  said  by  me.  The  sentiment  against  enforced  vaccination  is 
growing  in  volume  and  strength  every  day.  Jt  is  supported 
only  by  fear  and  confidence  in  medical  opinions  on  the  subject, 
opinions  actuated  in  the  main  by  self -interest.  Of  course,  there 
are  many  honest  and  conscientious  people  who  believe  in  vac- 
cination, and  they  are  easily  convinced  of  the  preventive  effects 
of  other  serum  remedies.  I  venture  to  say,  however,  that  there 
are  very  few  competent  doctors  who  believe  in  any  of  these 
remedies. 

But,  Mr.  President,  their  Inefficacy  Is  not  the  worst  of  it. 
If  this  were  all,  they  would  at  least  be  harmless;  but  it  has 
been  proved  over  and  over  again  that  they  are  worse  than 
harmless — they  are  dangerous  to  health  and  life.  Thousands 
of  lives  have  been  lost  by  the  most  violent  and  loathsome  dis- 
eases by  the  use  of  these  remedies.  That  is  clearly  shown  by 
the  communications  I  have  just  read.  And  the  doctors  are  not 
only  doubtful  of  the  new  serum  remedies  that  are  coming  into 
use,  but  they  are  fearful  of  their  effects  in  causing  and  trans- 
ferring other  and  new  diseases.  They  already  have  a  new  dis- 
ease, called  the  "  serum  disease."  The  Haf  tford  Times,  as  far 
back  as  1908,  had  this  to  say  on  the  subject,  most  of  the  facts 
being  taken  from  the  ^Inter-State  Medical  Journal: 

DOCTORS     ARE     ^VGKRIKD     OVKR     SKP.DM     DISEASES INJURIOUS     SYMPTOMS 

FOUND  TO    FOLLOW    INJECTIONS    OF   ANTITOXINS    IN    SOME    CASKS. 

Physicians    are   discussinz   an    ailment    to   which    the   name    "  serum 
disease"  is  now  applied.     The  name  is  used  to  describe  various  groups 
41017 — 10069 


57 

Of  symptoms  occurring  after  hypodermic  Injections  of  sera  nsefl  ttt 
combat  several  acute  diseases.  The  phenomena  arising  from  the  ad- 
ministration of  normal,  antitoxic  or  bactericidal  serum  at  first  were 
supposed  to  be  harmless,  but  this  has  been,  disproved. 

"Although  manifest  symptons  do  not  occur  in  more  than  one-third 
of  all  cases,"  says  Dr.  K.  W.  Saunders,  of  St.  Louis,  in  the  current 
issue  of  the  Inter-State  Medical  Journal,  "  the  cellular  reaction  to  the 
alien  serum  is  probably  present  in  every  individual  who  receives  an 
injection,  and  the  phenomena  may  bo  observed  to  a  greater  or  less 
degree  if  the  preper  tests  are  made." 

Dr.  Saunders  offers  seine  practical  rules  In  regard  to  the  nse  of  the 
various  sera  for  the  consideration  of  his  fellow  practitioners.  He  says : 
"  Curative  sera  are  not  the  harmless  substances  we  originally  supposed. 
Immunizing  injections  of  serum  should  not  bo  employed  when  isolation 
will  prevent  the  dise»se  with  a  reasonable  degree  of,  certainty  and  the 
children  can  be  watched. 

"  Serum  should  not  be  used  In  asthmatics  or  those  suffering  from 
Grave's  disease,  or  the  lymphatic  constitution,  except  in  developed  diph- 
theria. The  use  of  bactericidal  sera  of  doubtful  value  should  not  be 
encouraged  without  careful  consideration  of  all  the  possible  bad  effects. 

"  If  a  second  dose  of  serum  must  be  given  during  the  few  weeks  fol- 
lowing a  primary  injection,  small  repeated  doses  are  preferable  to  a 
large  single  dose. 

"  On  the  other  hand,  one  large  Initial  dose  Is  probably  less  harmful 
and  far  more  effective  than  several  doses  given  over  several  days. 

"THE     SYMPTOMS. 

"  In  some  of  the  cases  injected,  varying  from  10  to  40  per  cent,  after 
a  period  of  5  to  20  days,  the  patient  becomes  restless,  and  may  complain 
of  lassitude  and  pain  in  the  limbs.  QMiis  is  soon  followed  by  the  serum 
cxanthem,  which  is  often  acompanied  by  a  severe  itching  and  burning. 
The  serum  rash  varies  in  character.  Most  often  erythematous  patches, 
rose  red  in  color,  will  be  found  covering  various  parts  of  the  body. 
Sometimes  the  eruption  is  distinctly  scarlatiniforau  Occasionally  it 
resembles  measles. 

"A  very  striking  symptoin  Is  edema  of  the  skin,  which  may  be  present 
only  in  certain  circumscribed  spots  or  more  rarely  involve  the  whole 
integumear,  giving  the  person  a  ghastly,  bloated  appearance.  A  very 
serious  form  is  the  hen»rrh)*gic  type,  ill  which  hemorrhages  occur  in 
the  skin.  Fortunately  this  is  rare. 

"  Joint  pains  are  frequently  observed.  One  or  more  of  the  Joints 
may  become  very  tender  to  touch  and  to  movement.  Muscular  pains 
are  very  common.  Articular  swelling  may  be  present.  The  wrists 
knees,  hips,  elbows,  ankles,  and  shoulder  are  most  frequently  implicated. 

"  That  the  disease  is  a  general  dLsturban-ce  is  proved  by  the  fact  that 
on  elevation  of  temperature  is  frequently  present.  The  fever  may  be 
very  high.  Vomiting  and  diarrhea  occur  in  a  small  portion  of  cases. 

"  In  1800,  after  repeated  infections  of  diphtheria  antitoxin  in  the 
babies  of  the  Bethcsda  Foundlings'  Home,  I  had  the  opportunity  to 
observe  in  several  cases  the  sensitizing  effect  of  a  previous  injection. 

"  We  found  that  many  of  the  infants  who  had  received  an  im- 
munizing dose  six  wreks  previously  showed  a  very  marked  supersensi- 
bility  to  the  second  injection.  Tho  symptoms  of  scrum  disease,  which 
are  usually  delayed  a  week  or  more,  came  on  within  a  few  minutes  and 
with  much  greater  violence.  I  reported  these  observations  in  the  St. 
Louis  Courier  of  Medicine  in  1890.  Although  the  explanation  given 
then  does  not  entirely  harmonize  with  the  present  debated  theories,  the 
occurrence  of  a  supersensibility  and  the  clinical  symptoms  we're  clearly 
depicted. 

"  CONDITIONS   OFTEN  PROTRACTED. 

"  The  condition  is  sometimes  remarkably  protracted.  Thus.  In  one 
Instance,  in  a  little  girl  who  received  an  injection  of  autidiphtheritic 
serum  four  years  previously,  another  inaction  of  the  so-called  globulin 
antitoxin  produced  violent  symptoms  in  a  few  hours.  Hosenan  and 
Anderson  fouiKl  tho  condition  persisting  for  several  months.  It  is 
possible  that  this  superscasitiveness  may  »emaia  throughout  life  in 
certain  individuals,  and  that  it  may  be  transmitted  to  offspring,  as  is 
the  case  in  guinea  pigs. 

"  The  symptoms  of  this  second  reaction  are  very  similar  to  those  of 
th.e  primary  disease  but  supervene  very  soon  after  the  second  injection, 
sometimes  within  a  few  minutes.  There  may  be  a  chill,  convulsions, 
and  sudden  hisli  fever.  The  respiration  becomes  very  rapid,  the  pulse 
accelerated,  and  the  patient:  s-iiows  great  anxiety,  'in  some  cases  a 
severe  dermatitis,  with  local  pain  around  the  site  of  the  injection,  ap- 
pears. Bolton  reported  a  case 'of  local  gangrene. 
41017— 100GO 


58 

"As  far  as  I  can  learn  no  cases  of  death  have  occurred  in  human 
beings  by  the  repeated  injections  of  horse  serum,  yet  the  severe  symp- 
toms which  sometimes  occur  and  the  fact  that  gangrene  and  death 
are  so  "frequent  in  animals,  convinces  tbe  clinician  that  antitoxic  horse 
eerum  is  by  no  means  a  remedy  which  can  be  used  carelessly  or  indis- 
criminately. 

"Another  form  of  supersensitiveness  occurs  in  certain  individuals 
who  have  act  had  a  previous  injection  of  antitoxin.  Quite  a  number  of 
cases  have  teen  reported,  and  I  have  seen  a  number  myself  in  which  the 
immediate  serum  reaction  occurred,  and  yet  the  patient  injected  had 
never  before  had  a  dose  of  horse  Kernm.  No  explanation  can  be  offered 
for  these  cases  at  present  except  that  of  idiosyncrasy. 

"All  efforts  to  rid  the  curative  sera  of  the  toxic  substance  which 
sensitizes  have  proved  futile.  Meule's  observation  that  fresh  sera  have 
a  greater  tendency  to  cause  rashes  than  older  sera  has  been  refuted 
experimentally  by  Rosenan.  So  far  all  theories  offered  to  explain  this 
condition  have  rnet  all  the  known  facts." 

The  mistakes  the  doctors  mak«  in  diagnosing  cases  of  sup- 
posed smallpox  and  other  diseases  would  be  ludicrous  if  they 
were  not  so  serious  in  their  consequences.  Pasadena,  Cal.,  had 
a  conspicuous  case  of  this  kind.  Dr.  Stanley  P.  Black,  health 
officer  of  that  city,  was  called  to  pass  upon  the  case  of  two  chil- 
dren, pronounced  their  case  smallpox,  placarded  the  house, 
established  a  quarantine,  and  ordered  over  300  children,  who 
had  not  been  successfully  vaccinated,  excluded  from  the  schools. 
The  indignant  parents  of  the  excluded  children  demanded  that 
some  other  physician  be  called  in  to  determine  whether  the 
sick  children  really  had  the  smallpox.  But  the  health  officer, 
characteristic  of  his  kind,  refused  to  allow  another  doctor  to 
see  them.  An  indignation  meeting  of  citizens  was  called  and 
the  doctor  forced  to  allow  another  doctor  to  be  called.  The 
result  was  that  the  children  were  found  to  be  suffering  from 
poison  oak.  Then  the  health  officer  did  the  only  sensible  thing 
he  had  done  in  the  whole  transaction.  He  resigned. 

I  could  go  on  quoting  from  opinions  of  doctors  and  scientists 
nlmost  without  number  showing  how  useless  vaccination  is  and 
the  lives  that  have  been  sacrificed  by  the  use  of  vaccine  matter, 
but  it  would  serve  no  useful  purpose.  The  people  will  not  think 
for  themselves.  They  rely  upon,  the  doctors  and  vaccination  is 
a  rich  source  of  revenue  to  them.  They  know  110  more  about  its 
effects  than  do  other  people,  but  the  "  faith  in  the  doctor  and 
his  drugs  and  his  remedies,"  according  to  Dr.  Osier,  is  quite 
enough. 

But  there  Is  one  other  thing  to  which  I  call  the  attention  of 
the  Senate.  In  the  Public  Health  Reports  of  the  Public  Health 
and  Marine-Hospital  Service,  June  23,  1911,  Asst.  Snrg.  Gen. 
John  W.-Trask  has  this  to  say  on  the  subject  of  the 'probable 
or  possible  effects  of  vaccination : 

That  the  community  Is  protected  by  vaccination  may  be  true  for 
certain  localities,  but  that  the  protection  thus  afforded  is  general  can 
hardly  be  maintained.  Japan  as  a  nation  is  probably  as  well  or  better 
protected  by  vaccination  than  is  the  United  States,  and  yet  in  1907-8 
there  was  an  outbreak  of  smallpox  in  Japan  in  which  19,101  cases 
were  reported  with  G,273  deaths.  Vaccination  did  not  there  modify 
the  type  of  the  disease  to  that  found  In  America.  In  that  outbreak 
among  5,215  smallpox  patients  1,527  were  found  who  had  never  been 
vaccinated.  TMs  is  interesting,  as  indicating  a  relatively  small  number 
of  nnvaccinatcd  individuals.  The  epidemic  was  apparently  one  of  con- 
siderable virulence,  the  general  death  rate  per  hundred  being  42.25 
among  the  cases  in  1907  and  32.32  among  those  in  1908,  while  the 
deaths  among  the  unvaccinated  were  69.4  per  hundred  cases.  Kitasato 
believes  that  the  virulence  of  the  disease  varies,  and  that  when  it 
reaches  the  high  point  attained  in  Japan  during  1907-8  individuals 
who  have  been  previously  vaccinated,  and  even  those  who  have  previ- 
ously had  an  attack,  contract  the  disease.  In  this  outbreak  there  were 
41917— 109G9 


59 

242  rases  In  seven  prefectures  In  which  the  patients  had  previously  hafl 
the  disease.  Of  these,  57  died. 

If  the  nonvirulcnce  of  the;  disease  In  this  country  Is  due  to  protection 
by  vaccination  it  would  be  expected  that  the  mild  cases  would  be  fount] 
only  in  those  so  protected.  This  may  be  assumed  from  the  limited  in- 
formation available  not  to  be  the  case.  Records  of  the  vaccination 
history  of  all  patients  would  undoubtedly  add  much  to  our  knowledge  of 
the  subject. 

That  the  type  of  the  disease  as  seen  !n  the  United  States  1s  due  to 
the  protective  value  of  vaccination  is  shown  not  to  be  true  for  certain 
localities  in  which  outbreaks  of  the  virulent  form  of  the  disease  have 
been  reported.  These  outbreaks  have  occurred  at  widely  separated 

Eoiuts,  extending  from  Virginia  and  South  Carolina  In  1909  to  Mich- 
;an.  Oklahoma,  Texas,  and  Oregon  in  1910.  The  cases  of  the  disease 
reported  in  New  i'ork  City  in  1910  also  had  a  high  percentage  of 
deaths.  These  outbreaks  showed  a  high  virulence,  the  deaths  being 
at  the  rate  of  from  10.13  at  Cleveland,  Ohio,  to  54.05  in  Oklahoma 
County,  Okla.,  per  hundred  cases. 

This  comes  from  an  official  medical  source.  It  shows  two 
things:  (1)  That  the  doctors  do  not  know  whether  vaccination 
prevents  smallpox  or  not.  and  (2)  that  experience  tends  to 
prove  that  it  does  not  This  was  a  hard  blow  to  the  vaccina- 
tion doctors. 

LHn,  Mr.  President,  although  this  report  was  printed  less 
than  a  year  ago.  a  copy  of  it,  containing  this  statement,  can  not 
be  Lsifl  to-day.  I  understand  that  it  lias  been  reprinted  with 
this  poriion  of  it  suppressed.  I  suppose  Dr.  Trask  was  duly 
reprimanded  for  telling  the  truth  in  his  report.  I  venture  the 
assertion  that  he  was  not  a  member  cf  the  American  Medical 
Association  or  ho  never  would  have  fallen  into  the  error  of 
discrediting  a  practice  that  brings  so  much  money  to  tlie  pro- 
fession. With  all  the  claims  made  for  vaccination,  with  a  large 
part  of  the  doctors  its  use  never  could  have  been  maintained 
without*  compulsory  laws:  and  no  such  laws  could  ever  be 
passed  without  the  aid  of  the  doctors,  and  that  aid  would  not 
be  given  if  it  were  not  such  an  economic  source  of  revenue  to  the 
doctors.  The  law  that  compels  its  use  is  one  of  the  worst  laws 
that  good  citizens  who  believe  iu  liberty  have  cause  to  com- 
plain of. 

Mr.  John  Pitcairn  has  this  to  say  on  the  subject  in  the  Ladies' 
Home  Journal  for  May,  1910: 

Vaccination  is  the  putting  of  an  Impure  thin?  Into  the  blood — a 
virus  or  poison — often  resulting  In  serious  evil  effects.  In  vogue  for 
more  than  100  years,  it  has  been  received  by  most  persons  without 
question.  But  the  time  is  passing  when  people  will  accept  a  medical 
dogma  on  blind  faith ;  they  now  demand  to  know  something  about  the 
practices  to  which  they  are  called  on  to  submit;  and  most  Insistent 
of  all  should  be  the  demand  to  know  something  of  a  practice  which, 
like-  vaccination,  involves  the  risk  of  disease  and  of  possible  death. 
*  •  *  •  •  '  *  * 

But  I  need -hardly  appeal  to  statistics,  which  might  be  gathered  from 
every  civilized  country.  Consult  any  mother  having  practical  acquaint- 
ance with  the  results  of  vaccination,  as  observed  by  herself,  and  you 
will  rarely  fail  to  hear  something  of  its  serious  and  lasting  ill-effects. 

Surely  these  fa*:ts  and  figures  are  enough  to  show  that  vaccination 
involves  serious  risks,  and  to  make  it  incumbent  upon  all,  and  espe- 
cially on  parents,  to  make  some  inquiry  at  least  before  they  submit 
either  themselves  or  their  children  to  these  risks. 

But  some  one  may  ask,  if  all  this  is  true,  why  does  vaccination  con- 
tinue? It  continues,  very  largely,  because  it  is  enforced  by  law.  Take 
away  legal  compulsion  ond  vaccination  would  not  long  survive.  But  it 
has  been  enforced  almost  from  its  birth  and  has  thus  come  to  be 
regarded  as  more  or  less  a  matter  of  course.  In  all  modern  history  no 
other  medical  operation  has  ever  been  legally  enforced.  "But  vaccina- 
tion needed  enforcement.  Without,  compulsion  it  could  never  have 
survived,  for  from  the  very  day  of  its  introduction  it  has  been  strenu- 
ously opposed  both  by  layrnon  arid  by  membtrs  of  the  medical  profession. 
41017— 109G9 


60 

Eminent  physicians,  it  is  true,  have  supported  it,  but  equally  eminent 
physicians,  and  also  renowned  bacteriologists  and  statisticians,  have 
condemned  it  as  productive  of  the  gravest  injuries. 

With  respect  to  the  danger  and  uncertainty,  generally,  of 
these  serum  remedies  the  Journal  of  the  American  Medical  As- 
sociation of  January,  1910,  has  this  to  say : 

SKRUM    THERAPY    IN    A   COXDITTON  OF   CHAOS. 

There  Is  iio  class  of  remedial  agents  on  which  the  physician  should 
be  better  informed  and  none,  unfortunately,  concerning  which  it  is  so 
difficult  to  obtain  a  scientific  and  unbiased  opinion.  Only  one  of  the 
drugs  of  this  class — diphtheria  antitoxin — is  recognized  by  the  present 
United  States  Pharmncopteia ;  and  although  some  of  the  otners  (vaccine 
virus,  for  instance)  have  been  in  use  for  some  time,  all  arc  the  subject 
of  such  active  investigation  at  the  present  time  and  so  many  new  facts 
concerning  them  are  being  discovered  that  it  is  extremely  difficult  for  a 
practitioner  to  keep  abreast  of  these  developments. 

Scientific  and  disinterested  information  concerning  them  is  widely 
scattered  and  often  not  easily  accessible.  The  result  has  been  that 
physicians  have  become  dependent  to  an  unusual  degree  on  the  circulars 
issued  by  manufacturing  houses.  Some  of  these  circulars  are  almost 
models  of  scientific  accuracy ;  others,  unfortunately,  are  far  from 
accurate  and  the  directions  given  for  the  use  of  the  "products  are  not 
even  safe. 

And  yet  the  National  Government  with  all  of  its  power  is  forc- 
ing their  .use  upon  its  unwilling  citizens. 

[At  this  point  Mr.  WORKS  yielded  the  floor  for  the  day.] 

Tuesday,  April  80,  1912. 

ENFORCED    PHYSICAL    EXAMINATION    OP    SCHOOL    CIIILDEE??. 

Mr.  WOHKS.  Mr.  President,  the  doctors  composing  boards 
of  health  are  not  content  to  leave  it  to  the  parents  of  school 
children  to  determine  whether  children  shall  be  examined  by 
doctors  and  nurses  appointed  by  school  boards  to  detect  physical 
defects  or  not.  They  have,  in  some  of  the  States,  procured  laws 
providing  for  enforced  examinations,  leaving  no  choice  to  the 
parents,  and  will  do  so  in  every  State  if  they  can.  What  I  have 
said  about  the  methods  of  the  doctors  will  indicate  what  such 
a  license  would  mean.  Some  of  the  doctors  thus  employed  are 
honorable  and  conscientious  men.  Some  of  them,  it  may  safely 
be  said,  are  not.  And  most  of  them  are  inexperienced  and  some 
wholly  incompetent  It  has  been  said  that  what  a  doctor  looks 
for  in  the  way  of  disease  he  generally  finds.  In  these  school  ex- 
aminations they  have  found  an  astonishing  number  of  physical 
defects  that,  in  tbeir  estimation,  call  for  surgical  operations. 
And  generally  when  this  is  necessary  the  doctor  who  discovers 
the  fact  gets  the  job.  If  he  does  not,  some  other  doctor  does.  It 
adds  immensely  to  the  practice  and  revenues  of  the  profession. 
It  is  a  great  temptation  to  make  business  and  increase  the  prac- 
tice that  they  say  they  have  lost  through  "  irregular  practi- 
tioners." 

This  effort  to  get  possession  of  the  schools  by  the  doctors,  to 
the  exclusion  of  the  parents,  has  aroused  very  general  indigna- 
tion and  protest.  It  is  regarded  as  one  more  unwarranted  effort 
of  the  doctors  to  usurp  all  power  in  the  matter  of  health  regu- 
lation and  the  treatment  of  disease.  Compulsory  examination 
is  the  forerunner  of  compulsory  treatment.  This  statement  of 
the  conditions  of  ,th}ngs  under  such  a  law  of  compulsory  exami- 
nation in  Boston  is  typical  of  all  of  them. 

Children  of  the  Boston  school's,  by  a  new  regulation,  are  made  to 

undergo  a  physical  examination  which  will  necessitate  the  removal  of 

clothing.     A  storm  of  protests  from  many  parents,  as  well  as  children, 

was  aroused  yesterday  when  the  work  of  examination  of  800  girls  of 

41917- -109G9 


61 

the  Roxbury  High  School  was  nearly  completed.  Two  girls  strongly 
objected  to  the  examination,  but  finally  were  persuaded  to  submit. 
There  was  another  protest  from  the  residents  of  West  Roxbury  when 
about  GO  girls  were  subjected  to  the  examinations  at  West  Roxbury 
High  School  yesterday.  One  girl  who  objected  was  sent  home  to  her 
parents  and  told  to  consult  the  family  physician.  How  her  case  came 
out  is  not  known.  Although  the  statute  requiring  the  examination  has 
existed  since  190G,  the  examination  has  not  been  rigidly  enforced  ex- 
cept in  the  primary  schools,  but  this  year  it  is  to  apply  to  all  of  the 
grades.  It  is  over  the  high-school  and  normal-school  girls  between  14 
and  IS  years  of  age  that  objections  are  being  made.  The  board  of 
health  and  the  school  committee  both  support  the  regulation  as  neces- 
sary and  essential  in  maintaining  the  health  of  the  school  children  and 
as  a  preventive  to  disease.  The  heart,  lungs,  and  spine  may  be  ex- 
amined, and  feet  when  necessary. 

Mr.  President,  I  can  not  stop  now  to  enter  upon  any  extended 
argument  on  this  question.  It  seems  to  me  to  be  so  obnoxiously 
subversive  of  every  sense  of  personal  liberty  and  such  an  en- 
croachment on  the  rights  of  parents  to  have  control  of  their 
children  that  it  needs  no  discussion. 

BILL   IN   VIOLATION    OF    EIGHTS    OF  THE    STATES. 

Mr.  President,  it  is  a  conceded  fact  that  within  the  States 
health  regulations  ara  within  the  power  and  jurisdiction  of  the 
State  authorities,  and  it  is  an  authority  that  is  and  should  be 
jealously  guarded.  Ostensibly  this  bill  purports  to  confine  the 
activities  of  the  Government  in  this  respect  to  Federal  terri- 
tory and  within  Federal  jurisdiction.  If  it  does  not,  it  would 
at  once  be  declared  unconstitutional.  But  one  of  the  prime  ob- 
jects of  the  bill  is  to  extend  this  power  to  every  State  in  the 
Union,  and,  if  it  is  passed,  the  powers  granted  by  it  will  be 
used  for  that  very  purpose.  That  is  the  very  thing  the  doctors 
are  most  desirous  of  bringing  about.  The  bill  is  very  ingen- 
iously drawn  to  accomplish  this  result.  It  provides : 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  bureau  of  health  to  collect  and  disseminate 
Information  relating  to  the  public  health  and  to  enforce  the  observance 
of  all  regulations  and  laws  of  the  United  States  relating  to  the  public 
health. 

This  is  as  broad  and  comprehensive  as  language  can  well 
make  it.  It  is  attempted  or  pretended  to  be  modified  by  a  pro- 
viso to  the  effect  that  this  shall  not  authorize  the  bureau  of 
health  to—- 
exercise, or  attempt  to  exercise,  without  express  invitation  from  the 
chief  executive  or  other  proper  authority  of  Hie  State,  any  function 
belonging  exclusively  to  such  State. 

Under  this  clause  any  board  of  health  of  any  State  composed 
of  the  very  doctors  who  are  interested  in  extending  the  power 
of  this  health  bureau  to  the  farthest  limit  may  extend  this  in- 
vitation. These  two  interested  parties  will  not  be  long  in  ex- 
tending the  activities  of  this  bureau  into  the  States ;  and,  un- 
fortunately, if  it  were  left  wholly  to  the  executive  authority  of 
the  State  he  would,  as  a  rule,  leave  it  to  the  health  authorities 
and  the  result  would  be  the  earne.  The  author  of  the  bill  was 
not  quite  satisfied,  however,  with  this  convenient  opportunity 
to  invade  the  States.  The  director  of  health  is  authorized,  in 
his  discretion,  to  appoint  an  advisory  board  of  not  more  than 
seven  members,  who  may,  of  course,  be  doctors  of  the  regular 
school  in  as  many  States  "  to  confer  w.ith  him  *  *  *  con- 
cerning the  health  of  the  people,"  who  shall  hold  office  for  a 
term  of  seven  years. 
41917— 109G9 


62 

This  makes  a  very  close  and  satisfactory  connection  between 
State  and  Nation,  and  should  be  entirely  satisfactory  to  the 
doctors. 

But,  Mr.  President,  the  bill  does  not  stop  there.  It  gives  the 
director  of  health  power  to  request  the  health  authorities  of  all 
the  States  to  seoid  delegates — 

to  confer  with  him  or  his  duly  appointed  representatives  and  with  eacli 
other  at  such  time  and  place  as  he  may  designate  concerning  any  par- 
ticular matter  or  matters  relating  to  the  public  health. 

Not  only  so,  but  he  is  authorized  by  the  provisions  of  the  bill 
to  call  a  health  conference  of  all  the  States,  and  compelled  to 
do  so  upon  the  petition  of  the  health  authorities  of  five  States 
and  Territories. 

A  more  ingenious  attempt  to  evade  the  Constitution  aud  en- 
croach upon  the  province  of  the  States  in  one  of  their  most 
vital  and  sacred  rights  has  never  been  attempted.  The  obvious 
purpose  is  to  make  the  head  of  this  bureau  the  autocratic  power 
that  is  to  control  the  health  activities  of  the  whole  country. 
AH  he  needs  is  the  assent  and  cooperation  of  the  doctors  at  the 
head  of  the  health  boards  of  the  several  States,  and  as  that  is 
just  what  they  all  want  and  are  striving  to  obtain  by  this  bill, 
it  may  be  regarded  as  done  as  soon  as  the  bill  becomes  a  law. 

I  commend  these  considerations  to  the  careful  attention  of 
the  Senate. 

RESTRICTIVE    LAWS    IN  VIOLATION    OF   THE   CONSTITUTION. 

Mr.  President,  I  come  now  to  the  consideration  of  a  purely 
legal  question  presented  by  the  enactment  aud  enforcement  of 
the  restrictive  laws  that  I  have  endeavored  to  bring  to  the  at- 
tention of  the  Senate,  including  the  bill  under  consideration, 
which  is  a  part  of  the  scheme  to  deprive  certain  people  of  this 
country  of  the  right  to  heal  disease  and  ameliorate  human 
suffering  according  to  their  conscientious  convictions;  in  case 
of  some  of  them,  according  to  their  religious  views  of  right  and 
duty. 

In  the  consideration  of  this  question  I  shall  be  forced  to  give 
attention  particularly  to  the  rights  of  Christian  Scientists  in 
this  respect,  because,  whether  rightly  or  wrongly,  they  believe 
it  to  be  a  sacred  religious  duty  to  heal  the  sick  by  spiritual 
means,  as  they  understand  the  scriptural  command  to  heal  the 
sick,  and  the  mode  of  healing  pointed  out  by  the  Master  in  His 
teachings  and  example. 

This  being  their  attitude,  founded  upon  sincere  and  earnest 
conviction,  the  question  at  once  arises  whether  a  law  that  de- 
nies or  abridges  their  right  to  heal  in  their  own  way,  or  to 
receive  such  ministration  as  they  feel  to  be  the  proper  one,  is 
not  a  violation  of  the  express  provisions  of  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  designed  to  protect  the  people  of  the  country 
in  the  observance  of  their  religious  rights.  In  the  settlement 
of  this  momentous  question  we  must  consider  the  case  of  both 
the  one  who  administers  to  the  sick  and  the  one  who  seeks  and 
desires  this  mode  of  treatment.  Is  the  practitioner  of  this 
mode  of  healing,  in  which  he  has  supreme  faith  and  confidence, 
to  be  denied  the  right  to  exercise  his  right  to  practice?  Again, 
is  the  man  who  has  equal  trust  and  confidence  in  this  remedy 
to  be  denied  his  right  to  resort  to  it  for  help?  If  so,  why? 
41917—10960 


Only  because  some  other  people  do  not  believe  in  it.  This  is 
the  sole  foundation  for  any  arid  every  effort  that  has  been  made 
to  prevent  or  abridge  such  practice  unless  we  take  into  account 
the  selfish  desire  of  those  practicing  other  modes  of  healing  to 
uphold  themselves  by  the  prohibition  of  this  mode  of  healing. 

Mr.  President,  this  is  the  whole  question.  Not  whether  the 
Christian  Scientist  is  a  conscientious  Christian  man,  honestly 
and  trustfully  depending  upon  Divine  power  for  his  healing, 
but  whether  some  one  else,  who  may  represent,  for  the  time 
being,  the  power  of  government  in  the  enactment,  construction, 
and  enforcement  of  the  laws,  does  not  agree  with  him,  but  does 
believe  with  equal  honesty  and  good  faith  that  he  is  wrong  in 
his  beliefs  and  that  the  mode  of  healing  upon  which  he  relies 
is  not  effective,  and  that  his  pretensions  are  false  and  un- 
founded. 

Why,  Mr.  President,  this  very  conflict  of  views  on  a  religious 
question,  that  might  and  really  is  being  used  as  a  ground  for 
persecution  as  I  have  clearly  shown,  brings  us  within  the  very 
spirit  and  purpose  of  the  Constitution.  The  great  Catholic 
Church  has  its  creeds  and  its  religious  convictions,  with  which 
other  people  of  different  religious  views  do  not  agree,  and  which 
some  intolerant  people  would  suppress  by  law  if  the  Constitution 
and  the  courts  did  not  stand  for  freedom  of  religious  thought 
and  observance.  So  it  is  with  the  powerful  Protestant  religious 
denominations. 

But  all  of  these  Christian  bodies  believe  in  Divine  healing. 
They  pray  to  Almighty  God  for  the  healing  of  their  sick,  and 
believe  in  the  efficacy  of  such  prayer.  And  yet  some  people  be- 
longing to  these  religious  bodies,  I  hope  not  many  of  them,  deny 
to  the  Christian  Scientist  the  right  to  heal  by  prayer,  and  de- 
nounce his  pretensions  to  heal  through  the  power  of  the  same 
God  that  they  serve  and  trust  as  both  false  and  ungodly. 

There  is  this  difference  between  the  prayer  of  other  Christian 
people  and  Christian  Scientists :  Their  prayer  is  an  appeal  to 
God  for  intervention  in  the  particular  case.  They  attempt  to 
move  God  to  heal  the  individual.  The  Christian  Scientist  be- 
lieves that  God  is  unchangeable  and  that  He  can  not  be  moved 
by  prayer  to  do  or  not  to  do  a  desired  thing,  but  that  He  has 
already  and  for  all  time  given  man  all  good,  which  is  always 
there  for  him  when  he  conforms  to  His  laws  and  does  Ilis 
bidding.  Therefore  the  Christian  Scientist  prays  not  to  change- 
God  or  to  induce  Him  to  act,  but  to  change  man,  regenerate  him, 
and  bring  him  into  harmony  with  the  Divine  law  that  must 
restore  harmony  and  right  conditions  in  him,  which  means  nec- 
essarily restoration  to  natural  and  harmonious  conditions. 

It  is  the  belief  of  Christian  Scientists  that  the  purpose  of 
prayer  and  all  Christian  effort  is  to  regenerate  man  and  bring 
him  into  reconciliation  and  harmony  with  the  Divine  Being, 
and  that  "ris  effort  of  reconciliation  and  regeneration  by  prayer 
is  the  true,  the  only  true,  means  of  healing  the  sick. 

Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  persecuted  and  finally  crucified  for 
preaching  the  gospel  and  practicing  his  religious  belief,  by 
healing  the  sick.  To  do  the  same  to-day  in  the  twentieth 
century  in  the  great  State  of  New  York,  if  he  were  here,  would 
make  him  a  criminal,  subject  to  fine  and  imprisonment  by  the 
laws  of  that  State.  Only  a ''few  days  ago  a  Christian  Scientist 
41917— 109G9 


64: 

was  convicted  and  punished  for  healing  the  sick  as  he  believed 
in  the  way  and  by  the  same  power  and  principle  that  Jesus 
healed. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  who  is  to  determine  which  of  these  dif- 
ferent beliefs  sincerely  entertained  is  right  and  which  is  wrong. 
Who  is  authorized  or  who  will  be  permitted  under  our  Constitu- 
tion to  declare  one  of  these  beliefs  and  the  exercise  of  it  in  the 
healing  of  the  sick  a  crime? 

This  effort  to  enact  and  enforce  such  laws,  I  am  glad  to  say, 
is  not  being  made  by  the  people  of  other  church  denominations 
or  by  persons  entertaining  different  religious  beliefs.  I  think 
I  have  shown  that  it  comes  from  the  doctors  whose  emoluments 
are  -derived  from  the  effort  to  heal  disease  in  their  way,  not  for 
religious  but  for  purely  material  and  selfish  reasons. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  provides,  amendments 
to  the  Constitution,  Article  I: 

Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  an  establishment  of  religion  or 
prohibiting  the  free  exercise  thereof. 

This,  of  course,  is  a  prohibition  against  action  by  the  Federal 
Government.  Article  XIV,  section  1,  provides : 

No  State  shall  make  or  enforce  any  law  which  shall  abridge  the 
privileges  or  Immunities  of  citizens  of  the  United  States. 

There  can  be  no  higher  or  more  sacred  privilege  than  that  of 
exercising  one's  religion,  and  every  citizen  is  entitled  to  protec- 
tion from  any  law  that  would  deny  or  abridge  that  right. 

In  Reynolds  v.  United  States  (98  U.  S.,  145,  162),  the  court 
said: 

Congress  can  not  pass  a  law  for  the  government  of  the  Territories 
which  shall  prohibit  the  free  exercise  of  religion.  The  first  amendment 
to  the  Constitution  expressly  forbids  snch  legislation.  Religious  freedom 
is  guaranteed  everywhere  throughout  the  United  States,  so  far  as  con- 
gressional interference  is  concerned. 

But  in  that  case  the  court  distinguished  between  mere  re- 
ligious opinions  and  beliefs  and  overt  acts  made  criminal  by 
the  laws  of  the  land.  The  cotirt,  after  referring  to  an  early 
statute  of  Virginia  on  the  subject,  uses  this  further  language : 

In  the  preamble  of  this  act  (12  Hening's  Stat.,  84)  religions  freedom 
is  defined ;  and  after  a  recital  "  that  to  suffer  the  civil  magistrate  to 
intrude  Ills  powers  Snto  the  field  of  opinion,  and  to  restrain  the  pro- 
fession or  propagation  of  principles  on  supposition  of  their  ill  tendency, 
is  a  dangerons  fallacy  which  at  once  destroys  all  religious  liberty,"  it 
is  declared  "  that  it  is  time  enough  for  the  rightful  purposes  of  civil 
government  for  its  officers  to  interfere  when  principles  break  out  into 
overt  acts  'against  peace  and  good  order."  In  those  two  sentences  is 
found  the  true  distinction  between  what  properly  belongs  to  the  church 
and  what  to  the  State. 

The  effect  of  the  decision  seems  to  be  that  religious  belief 
can  not  be  punished ;  but  when,  under  the  guise  of  exercising 
one's  religion,  an  overt  act  "  against  peace  and  good  order  "  is 
committed  the  overt  act  is  punishable  by  the  State. 

This  was  a  case  where  the  defendant  was  prosecuted  for 
polygamy,  and  *lie  defended  on  the  ground  that  polygamy 
was  allowed  and  recognized  by  his  church, 

I  shall  snow,  I  think,  to  the  entire  satisfaction  of  the  Senate 
that  the  healing  of  the  sick  as  an  act  of  religious  duty  can  not 
be  regartled  as  an  overt  act  "against  peace  and  good  order," 
or  otherwise  in  violation  of  law  or  public  policy.  But,  looking 
at  it  in  the  light  of  tlie  fourteenth  amendment  to  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  treating  it  as  a  question  of  the  abridgment  of  the 
41917— 109G9 


65 

privileges  of  the  citizen,  the  case  of  American  School  of  Mag- 
netic Healing  v.  McAnnulty  is  interesting  and  instructive.  The 
case  was  one  where  the  Postmaster  General  had  excluded  from 
the  mails  certain  printed  matter  advertising  the  plaintiff  as  a 
magnetic  healer.  After  pointing  out  that  one  means  of  healing 
was  believed  in  by  some  and  different  means  by  others,  and 
that  no  one  could  determine  how  far  one  was  right  and  the 
other  was  wrong,  the  court  said: 

Again,  there  are  many  persons  who  do  not  believe  In  the  homeo- 
pathic school  of  medicine,  and  who  think  that  such  doctrine,  if  prac- 
ticed precisely  upon  the  lines  set  forth  by  its  originator,  is  absolutely 
inefficacious  in  the  treatment  of  diseases.  Are  homeopathic  physicians 
subject  to  be  proceeded  against  under  these  statutes  and  liable  at  the 
discretion  of  the  Postmaster  General,  upon  evidence  satisfactory  to 
him,  to  be  found  guilty  of  obtaining  money  under  false  pretenses  and 
their  letters  stamped  as  fraudulent  and  the  money  contained  therein 
as  payment  for  their  professional  services  sent  back  to  the  writers  of 
the  letters?  And,  turning  the  question  around,  can  physicians  of  what 
is  called  the  "old  school"  be  thus  proceeded  against?  Both  of  these 
different  schools  of  medicine  have  their  followers,  and  many  who  be- 
lieve in  the  one  will  pronounce  the  other  wholly  devoid  of  merit.  But 
there  is  no  precise  standard  by  which  to  measure  the  claims  of  either, 
for  people  do  recover  who  are  treated  according  to  the  one  or  the  other 
school.  And  so  it  is  said,  Do  people  recover  who  are  treated  under  this 
mental  theory?  By  reason  of  it?  That  can  not  be  averred  as  matter  of 
fact.  Many  think  they  ..do  Others  are  of  the  contrary  opinion.  Is 
the  Postmaster  General  to  decide  the  question  under  these  statutes? 

The  laws  under  consideration,  without  exception,  place  it 
within  the  power  of  a  board  of  health  composed  of  medical 
practitioners,  usually  of  one  school  of  medicine,  to  determine 
who  shall  practice  healing.  The  question  of  their  right  does 
not  depend  in  the  least  upon  their  knowledge  of  medicine  or 
medical  practice,  because  they  make  no  claim  to  any  such 
knowledge.  Manifestly  a  medical  practitioner  can  not  pass 
upon  their  fitness  to  heal  in  their  way,  because  he  is  as  ignorant 
of  their  way  of  healing  as  they  are  of  his.  Such  laws,  there- 
fore, in  practical  effect,  declare  that  no  one  but  a  medical  prac- 
titioner shall  be  allowed  to  practice  the  art  of  healing.  Whether 
the  act  says  so  or  not,  that  is  its  effect,  and  known  and  in- 
tended to  be  so.  It  is  a  denial  of  the  right  to  practice  except 
in  one  way.  All  other  modes  of  healing  are  prohibited,  and 
the  right  of  the  citizen  to  resort  to  any  other  is  denied.  As  a 
result,  there  can  be  no  advance  in  knowledge  in  other  modes 
of  healing  that  is  not  a  violation  of  law. 

Mr.  President,  when  a  question  like  this  confronts  us  the 
people  of  this  country  had  better  look  to  their  liberties.  Prof. 
James,  from  whose  address  I  have  already  quoted,  opposed  one 
of  such  bills  because  it  was  "  a  movement  in  favor  of  igno- 
rance." He  says,  with  emphasis,  that — 

The  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  is  not  a  medical  body,  has  no 
right  to  a  medical  opinion,  and  should  not  dare  to  take  sides  in  medical 
controversies. 

Truer  words  were  never  spoken,  and  they  are  just  as  true  of 
the  Federal  Government  as  they  are  of  the  State  of  Massachu- 
setts. 

This  should  be  enough  to  impel  the  lawmaking  power  to  hold 
its  hand.  But  if  it  does  not,  then  the  courts  must  determine 
whether  such  a  law,  affect  ing  the  rights  of  the  citizen  in  a  matter 
of  the  highest  import,  affecting  the  most  sacred  of  his  affairs, 
can  be  enacted  and  enforced  under  a  Constitution  like  ours 
under  the  fundamental  law  of  a  Nation  of  freemen. 
41917— 103G9-  :. 


C6 

The  case  of  State  v.  Biggs  (133  N.  C.)  Is  a  most  interesting 
and  instructive  one  on  this  subject.  The  defendant  was  prose- 
cuted under  one  of  the  acts  that  I  have  described  making  it 
a  crime  to  practice  medicine  without  a  license  and  specifically 
defining  the  meaning  of  the  words  "  practicing  medicine."  The 
opinion  was  delivered  by  Mr.  Justice  Clarke,  of  the  supreme 
court  of  that  State.  I  take  the  liberty  of  quoting  portions  of 
the  opinion: 

What  Is  "  the  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery  "  Is  as  wen  under- 
stood, and  Its  limits,  as  the  practice  of  dentistry.  The  courts  have 
also  held  that  of  the  many  schools  of  "  medicine  and  surgery "  the 
legislature  could  not  prescribe  that  any  one  was  orthodox  and  the  other 
heterodox,  but  that  those  professing  the  different  systems—"  allo- 
pathic," "  homeopathic,"  "  Thompsonian,"  and  the  like— should  be  ex- 
amined npon  a  course  such  as  is  taught  in  the  best  colleges  of  that 
school  of  practice,  but  that  It  is  not  essential  that  a  member  of  each 
or  of  any  special  school  should  be  upon  the  board  of  examiners. 
•  *»»»•» 

•  *     *     Under   the  guise  of   "  construction "    of   those   well-under- 
stood terms  the  "  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery  "  the  act  essays  to 
provide  that  the  expression  "  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery  "  shall 
be  construed  to  mean  the  management  "  for  fee  or  reward  "  of  any  case 
of  disease,  physical  or  mental,  real  or  imaginary,  with  or  without  drugs, 
surgical  operation,  surgical  or  mechanical  appliances,  or  by  any  other 
method  whatsoever ;  that  is,  the  practice  of  surgery  and  medicine  shall 
mean  practice  without  surgery  or  medicine  if  a  fee  is  charged.     If  no 
fee  is  charged,  then  the  words     surgery  and  medicine  "  drop  hack  to  their 
usual  and  ordinary  meaning,  as  by  long  usage  known  and  accustomed. 
Where,  then,  is  the  protection  to  the  public  if  such  treatment  is  valid 
when  done  without  fee  or  reward?     Yet  unless  the  act  confers  and  is 
intended  solely  to  confer  protection  upon  the  public  it  is  invalid.     The 
legislature  can  not  forbid  one  man  to  practice  a  calling  or  profession 
for  the  benefit  or  profit  of  another. 

*•••••• 

•  •     •     Then  It  Is  forbidden  to  relieve  a  case  of  suffering,  "  physical 
or  mental,"    in    any    method     unless    one    is    an    M.    D.     It    is    not 
even  admissible  to  "  minister  to  a  mind  diseased "  in  any  method    or 
even  dissipate  an  attack  of  the  "  blues  "  without  that  label  duly  cer- 
tified.    Is  not  this  creating  a  monopoly,  and  the  worst  of  monopolies, 
that  diseases  shall  not  be  cured  or  alleviated,  whether  real  or  imagi- 
nary, mental  or  physical,  though  without  medicine  or  surgery,  "  if  for 
a  fee,"  unless  one  has  undergone  an  examination  on  "  anatomy,  physi- 
ology,    surgery,     pathology,     medical     hygiene,     chemistry,     pharmacy, 
materia  medica,  therapeutics,  obstetrics,  and  the  practice  of  medicine  "  ? 

»•«»••» 

•  *     •     The  public  have  a  right  to  know  that  those  holding  them- 
selves out  as  members   of   that  ancient  and  honorable  profession  are 
competent   and  duly   licensed   as   such.     The   legislature   can   exert   its 
police  power  to  that  end,  because  it  is  a  profession  whose  practice  re- 
quires the  highest  skill  and  learning.     But  there  are  methods  of  treat- 
ment which  do  not  require  much  skill  and  learning,  if  any.     Patients 
have  a  right  to  use  such  methods  if  they  wish,  and  the  attempt  to  re- 
quire an  examination  of  the  character  above  recited  for  the  application 
of  such  treatment  is  not  warranted  by  any  legitimate  exercise  of  the 
police  power.     *     *     * 

The  term  "  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery  "  embraces  probably  the 
larger,  and  certainly  by  far  the  most  profitable,  part  of  the  "  treatment 
of  diseases,"  but  is  not  coextensive  with  the  latter  term,  and  can  not 
be  made  so  unless  "  surgery  and  medicine  "  are  adopted  as  the  State 
system  of  treatment,  a  monopoly,  and  all  other  methods  are  made  indict- 
able. On  the  other  hand,  the  State  Medical  Society  would  hardly  wish 
to  broaden  out  so  as  to  take  in  all  methods  of  treatment  of  disease,  for 
this  would  be  to  take  in  practitioners  and  practices  which  they  would 
not  wish  to  recognize.  All  the  law  so  far  has  done  or  can  do  is  to 
require  that  those  practicing  on  the  sick  with  knife  and  drugs  shall  be 
examined  and  found  competent  by  those  "  of  like  faith  and  order." 

Dr.  ^JCiver  Wendell  Holmes,  in  an  address  before  the  Medical  So- 
ciety in  Massachusetts,  said :  "  If  the  whole  materia  medica  was 
sunk  to  the  bottom  of  the  sea  it  would  be  all  the  better  for  mankind 
and  all  the  worse  for  the  flshes."  An  eminent  medical  authority  In 
41917— 10009 


67 

this  State  has  said  that  out  of  24  serious  cases  of  disease  3  could  not 
he  cured  by  the  hest  remedies,  3  others  might  he  benefited,  and  the  rest 
would  get  well  anyway.  Stronger  statements  could  he  cited  from  the 
most  eminent  medical  authorities  the  world  has  known.  Medicine  is  an 
experimental,  not  an  exact,  science.  All  the  law  can  do  is  to  regulate 
and  safeguard  the  use  of  powerful  and  dangerous  remedies,  like  the 
knife  and  drugs,  hut  it  can  not  forbid  dispensing  with  them.  When 
the  Master,  who  was  Himself  called  the  Good  Physician,  was  told  that 
other  than  His  followers  were  casting  out  devils  and  curing  diseases, 
He  said,  "  Forbid  them  not." 

The  case  last  referred  to  did  not  relate  to  tlie  religions  side 
of  the  question.  The  defendant  made  no  claim  that  gave  rise 
to  any  such  question.  But  the  courts  of  this  country  have  jeal- 
ously guarded  the  religious  rights  and  opinions  of  the  people  as 
within  the  protection  of  the  Constitution.  The  case  of  the 
Church  of  the  Holy  Trinity  v.  United  States  (143  U.  S.,  457), 
while  not  involving  a  constitutional  question,  is  an  interesting 
one  as  showing  the  attitude  of  the  highest  court  in  the  country 
in  matters  of  religion. 

The  plaintiff  in  the  case  had,  by  contract,  employed  a  for- 
eigner as  its  minister  or  rector.  The  question  was  whether 
such  a  contract  was  in  violation  of  the  statute  forbidding  the 
"  importation  and  migration  of  foreigners  and  aliens  under  con- 
tract or  agreement  to  perform  labor  in  the  United  States."  It 
was  conceded  that  the  case  was  within  the  letter  of  the  statute, 
but  it  was  held  not  to  be  within  its  spirit.  The  court,  looking 
to  the  title  of  the  act  and  the  evils  evidently  intended  to  be  met 
by  it,  decided  that  its  object  was  to  "  stay  the  influx  of  cheap 
unskilled  labor  "  into  this  country. 

In  commenting  upon  this  situation  Mr.  Justice  Brewer  had 
this  to  say  on  the  religious  phase  of  the  question : 

But  beyond  all  these  matters  no  purpose  of  action  against  religion 
can  be  imputed  to  any  legislation,  State  or  national,  because  this  is  a 
religious  people.  This  is  historically  true.  From  the  discovery  of  this 
continent  to  the  present  hour  there  is  a  single .  voice  making  thia 
affirmation. 

And,  after  referring  to  numerous  historical  instances  showing 
the  reliance  of  our  people  upon  Divine  guidance  and  support  in 
dealing  with  grave  problems  and  important  events,  the  learned 
justice  says  further : 

Coming  nearer  to  the  present  time,  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
recognizes  the  presence  of  the  Divine  in  human  affairs  in  these  words  : 
"  We  hold  these  truths  to  he  self-evident,  that  all  men  are  created 
equal ;  that  they  are  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  certain  inalienable 
rights ;  that  among  these  are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happi- 
ness." "  We,  therefore,  the  representatives  of  the  United  States  of 
America,  in  general  Congress  assembled,  appealing  to  the  Supreme  Judge 
of  the  world  for  the  rectitude  of  our  intentions,  do,  in  the  name  and  by 
.authority  of  the  good  people  of  these  Colonies,  solemnly  publish  and 
declare,"  etc.  "And  for  the  support  of  this  declaration,  with  a  firm 
reliance  on  the  protection  of  Divine  Providence,  we  mutually  pledge  to 
each  other  our  lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our  sacred  honor." 

If  we  examine  the  constitutions  of  the  various  States  we  find  in 
them  a  constant  recognition  of  religious  obligations.  Every  constitu- 
tion of  every  one  of  the  44  States  contains  language  which  either 
directly  or  by  clear  implication  recognizes  a  profound  reverence  for  re- 
ligion and  an  assumption  that  its  influence  in  all  human  affairs  is 
essential  to  the  well-being  of  the  community.  This  recognition  may  be 
in  the  preamble,  such  as  is  found  in  the  constitution  of  Illinois,  1870: 
"  We,  the  people  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  grateful  to  Almighty  God  for 
the  civil,  political,  and  religious  liberty  which  He  hath  so  long  per- 
mitted us  to  enjoy,  and  looking  to  Him  for  a  blessing  upon  our  en- 
deavors to  secure  and  transmit  the  same  unimpaired  to  succeeding 
generations,"  etc. 
41917—10909 


68 

He  proceeds  at  length  to  quote  from  the  constitutions  of  the 
various  States,  showing  their  intention  to  encourage  free  and 
unrestrained  reliance  upon  religion  in  the  affairs  of  men.  Tlieu 
he  says: 

There  is  no  dissonance  in  these  declarations.  There  is  a  universal 
language  pervading  them  all,  having  one  meaning ;  they  affirm  and 
reaffirm  that  this  is  a  religious  Nation.  These  are  not  individual  say- 
ings, declarations  of  private  persons  ;  they  are  organic  utterances ;  they 
speak  the  voice  of  the  entire  people.  While,  because  of  a  general  rec- 
ognition of  this  truth,  the  question  has  seldom  been  presented  to  the 
courts,  yet  we  find  that  in  Updegraph  v.  The  Commonwealth  (11  S.  & 
R.,  394,  400)  it  was  decided  that  "  Christianity,  general  Christianity, 
is,  and  always  has  been,  a  part  of  the  common  law  of  Pennsylvania  ; 
*  *  *  not  Christianity  with  an  established  church,  and  tithes,  and 
spiritual  courts,  but  Christianity  with  liberty  of  conscience  to  all 
men."  And  in  The  People  v.  Uuggles  (.8  Johns,  290,  294,.  295)  Chan- 
cellor Kent,  the  great  commentator  on  American  law,  speaking  as 
chief  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  New  York,  said  :  "  The  people  of 
this  State,  in  common  with  the  people  of  this  country,  profess  the  gen- 
eral doctrines  of  Christianity  as  the  rule  of  their  faith  and  practice  ; 
and  to  scandalize  the  author  of  these  doctrines  is  not  only,  in  a  reli- 
gious point  of  view,  extremely  impious,  but  even  in  respect  to  the 
obligations  due  to  society  is  a  gross  violation  of  decency  and  good 
order.  *  *  *  The  free,  equal,  and  undisturbed  enjoyment  of  reli- 
gious opinion,  whatever  it  may  be,  and  free  and  decent  discussions  on 
any  religious  subject  is  granted  and  secured ;  but  to  revile,  with  mali- 
cious and  blasphemous  contempt,  the  religion  professed  by  almost  the 
whole  community  is  an  abuse  of  that  right.  Nor  are  we  bound  by  any 
expressions  in  the  Constitution,  as  some  have  strangely  supposed, 
either  not  to  punish  at  all  or  to  punish  indiscriminately  the  like  at- 
tacks upon  the  religion  of  Mahomet  or  of  the  Grand  Lama,  and  for  this 
plain  reason,  that  the  case  assumes  that  we  are  a  Christian  people, 
and  the  morality  of  the  country  is  deeply  ingrafted  upon  Christianity 
and  not  upon  the  doctrines  or  worship  of  those  impostors."  And  in 
the  famous  case  of  Tidal  v.  Girard's  Executors  (2  How.,  127,  198)  this 
court,  while  sustaining  the  will  of  Mr.  Girard,  with  its  provision  for 
the  creation  of  a  college  into  which  no  minister  should  be  permitted  to 
enter,  observed  :  "  It  is  also  said,  and  truly,  that  the  Christian  religion 
is  a  part  of  the  common  law  of  Pennsylvania." 

Mr.  Tiedeman,  in  his  work,  State  and  Federal  Control  of 
Persons  and  Property,  says : 

The  complete  abrogation  of  all  State  interference  in  matters  of  religion 
is  of  slow  growth  and  can  only  be  attained  with  the  growth  of  public 
opinion. 

The  one  great  trouble  is  that  so  many  sects  or  churches  believe 
that  theirs  is  the  only  religion  and  that  every  claim  of  religious 
belief  that  conflicts  with  theirs  is  un-Christian  and  no  religion 
at  all.  It  is  this  spirit  and  the  intolerance  that  springs  from 
it  that  stands  in  the  way  of  every  change  of  religious  belief  or 
the  establishment  of  any  new  or  reform  movement  of  a  religious 
character.  That  is  just  what  the  Christian  Scientists  are  com- 
bating to-day.  While  they  agree  with  the  orthodox  churches 
in  all  the  essentials  of  the  Christian  religion,  they  are  denounced 
as  an  ungodly  people  because  they  go  further  than  the  old 
churches  in  attempting  to  obey  the  whole  command:  "Preach 
the  gospal  and  heal  the  sick." 

That  tbey  believe  in  all  the  essentials  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion is  fully  shown  by  the  tenets  of  the  church,  as  follows: 

1.  As  adherents  of  Truth,  wo  take  the  inspired  Word  of  the  Bible  as 
our  sufficient  guide  to  eternal  Life. 

2.  We  acknowledge   and   adore   one   supreme   and    infinite   God.     Wo 
acknowledge  Ills  Son,  one  Christ ;  the  Holy  Ghost  or  divine  Comforter  ; 
and  man  in  God's  imago  and  likeness. 

3.  We  acknowledge  God's  forgiveness  of  sin  in  the  destruction  of  sin 
an;l  the  spiritual  understanding  thaf  casts  out  evil  as  unreal.     But  the 
belief  In  sin  is  punished  so  long  as  the  belief  lasts. 

4.  We  acknowledge  Jesus's  atonement  as  the  evidence  of  divine,  effi- 
cacious Love,  unfolding  man's  unity  with  God  through  Christ  Jesus  the 

41917 — 10SG9 


60 

Way-shower ;  and  we  acknowledge  that  man  is  saved  through  Christ, 
through  Truth,  Life,  and  Love,  as  demonstrated  by  the  Galilean  Prophet 
in  healing  the  sick  and  overcoming  sin  and  death. 

5.  We  acknowledge   that   the   crucifixion   of  Jesus   and   His   resurrec- 
tion served  to  uplift  faith,  to  understand  eternal  Life,  even  the  allness 
of  Soul,  Spirit,  and  the  nothingness  of  matter. 

6.  And  we  solemnly  promise  to  watch  and  pray  for  that  Mind  to  be 
in  us  which  was  also  in  Christ  Jesus  ;  to  do  unto  others  as  we  would 
have  them  do  unto  us ;  and  to  be  merciful,  just,  and  pure. 

Believing,  as  they  do,  that  the  healing  of  disease  is  a  Christian 
duty  imposed  upon  them  by  the  command  of  the  Master,  a  law 
that  forbids  it  or  abridges  their  right  and  privilege  to  heal  the 
sick  is  a  plain  violation  of  both  of  the  constitutional  inhibitions 
above  mentioned. 

Mr.  Tiedeman  says  further  on  this  subject: 

SEC.  C3.  Police  regulation  of  religion — constitutional  restrictions:  If 
there  were  no  provisions  in  the  American  Constitution  especially  appli- 
cable to  the  matter  of  police  regulation  of  religion,  the  considerations 
which  would  deny  to  the  State  the  control  and  prevention  of  vice  would 
also  constitute  insuperable  objections  to  State  interference  in  matters 
of  religion.  But  the  rivalry  and  contention  of  the  religious  sects  not 
only  demanded  constitutional  prohibition  of  the  interference  of  the 
National  Government,  but  gave  rise  to  the  incorporation  of  like  prohi- 
bitions in  the  various  State  constitutions.  The  exact  phraseology 
varies  with  each  constitution,  but  the  practical  effect  is  believed  in  the 
main  to  be  the  same  in  all  of  them.  These  provisions  not  only  pro- 
hibit all  church  establishments,  but  also  guarantee  to  each  individual 
the  right  to  worship  God  in  his  own  way,  and  to  give  free  expression 
to  his  religious  views.  The  prohibition  of  a  religious  establishment  not 
only  prevents  the  establishment  of  a  distinctively  State  church,  but 
likewise  prohibits  all  preferential  treatment  of  the  sects  in  the  bestowal 
of  State  patronage  or  aid.  A  law  is  unconstitutional  which  gives  to 
one  or  more  religious  sects  a  privilege  that  is  not  enjoyed  equally  by 
all.  "  Whatever  establishes  a  distinction  against  one  class  or  sect  is, 
to  the  extent  to  which  the  distinction  operates  unfavorably,  a  persecu- 
tion, and  if  based  on  religious  grounds  a  religious  persecution.  The  ex- 
tent of  the  discrimination  is  not  material  to  the  principle,  it  is  enough 
that  it  creates  an  inequality  of  right  or  privilege." 

And  the  reasons  that  brought  about  this  constitutional  inhibi- 
tion against  interference  with  religious  belief  and  observance  is 
thus  clearly  pointed  out  by  the  same  author : 

*  *  *  Most  of  the  immigrants  to  American  colonies  were  refugees 
from  religious  oppression,  driven  to  the  wilds  of  America  in  order  to 
worship  the  God  of  the  universe  according  to  the  dictates  of  their 
conscience.  The  PurilaiiK  of  New  England,  the  Quakers  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, the  English  Catholics  of  Maryland,  and  the  Huguenots  of  the 
Carolinas  sought  on  this  continent  that  religious  liberty  which  was  not 
to  be  found  in  Europe.  I  should  not  say  "  religious  liberty,"  for  that 
is  not  what  they  sought.  They  desired  only  to  be  freed  from  the  re- 
straint of  an  intolerant  and  imposing  majority.  They  desired  only  to 
settle  in  a  country  where  the  adherents  of  their  peculiar  creed  could 
control  the  affairs  of  state.  Notwithstanding  their  sad  experience  in 
the  Old  World,  when  they  settled  in  America  they  became  as  intolerant 
of  dissenters  from  the  faith  of  the  majority  as  their  enemies  had  been 
toward  them. 

Mr.  President,  I  need  not,  in  a  body  like  this,  consume  time  in 
discussing  fundamental  questions  affecting  the  liberty  and  free- 
dom of  the  individual  and  the  necessary  restraints  imposed  upon 
him  because  of  his  association  with  others,  composing  civil  or 
governmental  organizations.  But  the  claim  of  right  to  restrain 
such  liberties  for  the  good  of  the  community  or  the  public  has 
given  rise  to  many  problems  and  has  unjustly  deprived  many  of 
their  liberties.  The  police  power,  so  called,  is  sometimes  neces- 
sary for  the  protection  of  tlie  public,  but  it  has  quite  as  fre- 
quently been  made  the  engine  of  oppression  to  the  destruction, 
without  just  cause,  of  the  most  sacred  rights  of  the  individuj\l 
41917 — 10909 


70 

citizen.  Generally  the  courts  stand  in  the  way  of  the  unlawful 
use  of  this  power,  but  the  extent  to  which  it  has  been  enforced 
by  the  courts  at  times  has  been  most  alarming. 

There  is  no  case,  perhaps,  in  which  an  unlawful  and  oppressive 
nse  of  this  great  power  has  occurred  to  a  greater  extent  than 
In  the  cases  I  am  now  considering.  The  doctors  assume,  and  are 
able  to  make  lawmakers  believe,  that  the  effort  to  heal  disease 
in  any  way  but  theirs  is  against  public  policy  and  should,  as  a 
police  regulation,  be  suppressed  by  law.  That  is  the  ground 
upon  which  all  of  the  restrictive  laws  that  I  have  been  discuss- 
ing are  attempted  to  be  sustained. 

Unfortunately  such  laws  are  neither  enacted  nor  construed  by 
the  courts  from  knowledge  or  upon  evidence  proving  the  ineffi- 
cacy  of  the  mode  of  healing  sought  to  be  prevented.  More 
unfortunately  still,  in  the  minds  of  many  the  question  resolves 
itself  into  a  religious  one  that  in  the  intolerant  religious  mind 
is  controlled  neither  by  reason  nor  justice.  With  such,  if  a 
thousand  respectable  and  reliable  people  should  testify  to  their 
healing  through  such  means  they  would  not  be  credited  as 
against  one  competent  medical  practitioner  who  should  say 
that  disease  could  not  be  cured  that  way,  or  the  word  of  one 
theologian  who  should  insist  that  the  attempt  to  heal  in  any 
such  way  is  un-Christian  and  ungodly. 

I  hope  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  win  be  actuated  by  a 
higher  and  broader  sense  of  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  citi- 
zen and  judge  the  question  by  the  rules  of  right,  justice,  and 
reason. 

Judge  Cooley,  In  his  admirable  work  on  Constitutional  Limi- 
tations, thus  defines  the  police  power  of  a  State : 

The  police  of  a  State,  fn  a  comprehensive  sense,  embraces  Its  whole 
system  of  Internal  regulation,  by  which  the  State  ceeks  not  only  to  pre- 
servo  the  public  order  and  to  prevent  offenses  against  the  State,  but 
also  to  establish  for  the  Intercourse  of  citizens  with  citizens  those  rules 
of  good  manners  and  good  neighborhood  which  are  calculated  to  prevent 
a  conflict  of  rights,  and  to  insure  to  each  the  uninterrupted  enjoyment 
of  hia  own  so  far  as  la  reasonably  consistent  with  a  like  enjoyment  of 
right*  by  others. 

Of  course  the  exercise  of  this  power  usually  arises  in  respect 
of  the  use  of  property.  But  it  does  present  itself  upon  the  ques- 
tion of  religious  liberty.  In  speaking  of  the  constitutional  inhi- 
bition against  laws  affecting  religious  beliefs  and  observance, 
Judge  Cooley  Bays  further: 

Those  things  which  are  not  lawful  nnder  any  of  the  American  con- 
stitutions may  be  stated  thus : 

i.  Any  law  respecting  an  establishment  of  religion.  The  legislatures 
have  not  been  left  at  liberty  to  effect  a  onion  of  church  and  state,  or 
to  establish  preferences  by  law  in  favor  of  any  one  religious  persuasion 
or  mode  of  worship.  There  is  not  complete  religious  liberty  where  any 
one  sect  is  favored  by  the  State  and  given  an  advantage  by  law  over 
other  sects.  Whatever  establishes  a  distinction  against  one  class  or 
sect  Is,  to  the  extent  to  which  the  distinction  operates  unfavorably,  a 
persecution  ;  and  if  based  on  religious  grounds,  a  religious  persecution. 
The  extent  of  the  discrimination  is  not  material  to  the  principle  ;  it  is 
enough  that  it  creates  an  inequality  of  right  or  privilege.  *  *  * 

4.  Restraints  upon  the  free  exercise  of  religion  according  to  the  dictates 
of  the  conscience.  No  external  authority  Is  to  place  itself  between  the 
finite  being  and  the  infinite  when  the  former  is  seeking  to  render  the 
homage  that  is  due,  and  in  a  mode  which  commends  itself  to  his  con- 
science and  judgment  as  being  suitable  for  him  to  render,  and  acceptable 
to  its  object. 

41917— 109GO 


71 

5.  Restraints  upon  the  expression  cf  religion?  belief.  An  earnest  be- 
liever usually  regards  it  as  his  duty  to  propagate  his  opinions,  and  to 
brin}:  others  to  his  views.  To  deprive  him  of  this  right  is  to  take  from 
him  the  power  to  perform  what  he  considers  a  most  sacred  obligation. 

Mr.  Freund,  in  bis  work  on  Police  Power,  in  speaking  under  ft 
subhead  entitled  "  Restraint  of  religious  activity  in  behalf  of 
i Le  public  welfare,"  has  this  to  say : 

There  are  two  kinds  of  legislation  that  would  fall  under  this  head — 
measures  for  the  repression  of  practices  deemed  disorderly  or  danger- 
ous and  the  regulation  of  religious  societies,  chiefly  with  reference  to 
their  property  rights.  This  legislation  will  also  be  considered  sepa- 
rately. 

The  essence  and  value  of  the  constitutional  guaranty  lies  In  two 
points  :  First,  that  religious  belief  as  such  and  its  peaceful  and  orderly 
manifestation  in  worship  and  precept  may  not  be  treated  as  a  menace 
TO  (he  peace  and  welfare  of  the  community  or  as  a  possible  cause  of 
disorder ;  and,  second,  that  whatever  restraint  is  placed  upon  religious 
activity,  through  rules  of  property  or  otherwise,  must  be  applied  to  all 
denominations  alike  in  order  to  avoid  the  preference  and  discrimination 
which  the  constitutions  forbid. 

Mr.  President,  it  will  be  found  that  the  police  power  can  not 
be  invoked  to  restrain  religious  belief  or  action  except  where 
the  acts  committed  in  the  name  of  religion  are  in  some  way 
a  menace  to  the  peace  and  welfare  of  the  community  or,  as  is 
said  in  Reynolds  v.  United  States,  already  referred  to,  "against 
peace  and  good  order." 

In  Ex  parte  Jentzsch  (112  Cal.,  468),  the  Supreme  Court  of 
California,  in  passing  upon  a  law  of  that  State  closing  barber 
shops  on  Sunday,  has  this  to  say  : 

Upon  the  question  thus  presented  of  the  proper  limits  of  the  police 
power,  much  might  be  written,  and  much,  indeed,  will  have  to  he 
written,  ere  just  bounds  arc  sot  to  its  exercise;  but,  in  this  case, 
neither  time  permits  nor  necessity  demands  the  consideration.  Still, 
it  may  be  suggested,  in  passing,  that  our  Government  was  not  de- 
signed to  ho  paternal  in  form.  ~~  We  are  a  self-governing  people,  and 
cur  just  pride  is  that  our  laws  arc  made  by  us  as  well  as  for  us. 
10 very  individual  citizen  is  to  be  allowed  so  much  liberty  as  may  exist 
without  Impairment  of  the  equal  rights  of  his  fellows.  Our  institu- 
tions are  founded  upon  the  conviction  that  we  are  not  only  capable 
of  self-government  as  a  community  but,  what  is  the  logical  necessity, 
that  we  are  capable  to  a  great  extent  of  individual  self-government. 
If  this  convictiDii  shall  prove  ill  founded  we  have  built  our  house  upon 
fjiiid.  The  spirit  of  a  system  such  as  curs  is  therefore  at  total  variance 
with  that  which,  more  or  less  veiled,  still  shows  in  the  paternalism 
of  other  nations.  It  may  be  injurious  to  health  to  eat  bread  before 
it  is  12  i  hours  old,  yet  it  would  strike  us,  with  surprise  to  see  the  legis- 
lature making  a  crime  of  the  sale  of  fresh  bread.  We  look  with  dis- 
favor upon  such  legislation  as  we  do  upon  the  enactment  of  sumptuary 
laws.  We  do  not  even  punish  a  man  for  his  vices  unless  they  be 
practiced  openly,  so  as  to  lead  to  the  spread  of  corruption  or  to 
breaches  of  the  peace  or  to  public  scandal.  In  brief,  we  give  to  the 
individual  the  utmost  possible  amount  of  personal  liberty,  and,  with 
that  guaranteed  him,  lie  is  treated  as  a  person  of  responsible  judg- 
ment, not  as  a  child  in  his  nonage,  and  is  left  free  to  work  out  his 
as  impulse,  education1,  training,  heredity,  and  environment 
direct  him. 

So.  while  the  police  power  is  one  whose  proper  use  makes  most 
potently  for  good,  in  its  undefined  scope  and  inordinate  exercise  lurks 
no  small  danger  to  the  Republic,  for  the  difficulty  which  is  experienced 
in  defining  its  just  limits  and  bounds  affords  a  temptation  to  the  legis- 
lature to  encroach  upon  the  rights  of  citizens  with  experimental  laws, 
none  the  less  dangerous  because  well  meant. 

There  are  cases  in  which  the  true  distinction  is  clearly  made 
between  the  proper  exercise  of  religious  duties,  according  to 
OIM-'S  conscience,  and  the  commission  of  unlawful  acts  under  the 
guise  of  religious  beliefs.  It  must  be  conceded  that  no  one  school 
should  be  allowed  to  commit  a  crime  or  any  act  against  peace, 

41917— 109G9 


72 

good  order,  or  morals,  and  then  justify  himself  under  the  claim 
that  the  act  was  in  accordance  with  his  religious  beliefs. 

This  distinction  is  clearly  drawn  in  Davis  v.  Beason  (133 
TT.  S.,  333,  342),  where  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States, 
through  Mr.  Justice  Field,  made  this  clear  and  convincing  state- 
ment of  the  rule  on  the  subject : 

The  term  "  religion  "  has  reference  to  one's  views  of  his  relations  to 
his  Creator,  and  to  the  obligations  they  impose  of  reverence  for  his 
being  and  character,  and  of  obedience  to  His  will.  It  is  often  con- 
founded with  the  cultus,  or  form  of  worship  of  a  particular  sect,  but  Is 
distinguishable  from  the  latter.  The  first  amendment  to  the  Constitu- 
tion, in  declaring  that  Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  the  estab- 
lishment of  religion,  or  forbidding  the  free  exercise  thereof,  was  in- 
tended to  allow  everyone  under  the  Jurisdiction  of  the  United  States  to 
entertain  such  notions-  respecting  his  relations  to  his  Maker  and  the 
duties  they  impose  as  may  be  approved  by  his  judgment  and  conscience. 
and  to  exhibit  his  sentiments  in  such  form  of  worship  as  he  may  think 
proper,  net  injurious  to  the  equal  rights  of  others,  and  to  prohibit 
legislation  for  the  support  of  any  religious  tenets,  or  the  modes  of  wor- 
ship of  any  sect.  The  oppressive  measures  adopted  and  the  cruelties 
and  punishments  inflicted  by  the  Governments  of  Europe  for  many  ages 
to  compel  parties  to  conform,  in  their  religious  beliefs  and  modes  of 
worship,  to  the  views  of  the  most  numerous  sect  and  the  folly  of  at- 
tempting in  that  way  to  control  the  mental  operations  of  persons  and 
enforce  an  outward  conformity  to  a  prescribed  standard  led  to  the 
adoption  of  the  amendment  in  question. 

It  was  never  Intended  or  supposed  that  the  amendment  could  be  in- 
yo_ked  as  a  protection  against  legislation  for  the  punishment  of  acts 
inimical  to  the  peace,  good  order,  and  morals  of  society.  With  man's 
relations  to  his  Maker  and  the  obligations  he  may  think  they  impose, 
and  the  manner  in  which  an  expression  shall  be  made  by  him  of  his 
belief  on  those  subjects,  no  interference  can  be  permitted,  provided 
always  the  laws  of  society,  designed  to  secure  its  peace  and  prosperity 
and  the  morals  of  its  people,  are  not  interfered  with.  However  free  the 
exercise  of  religion  may  be,  it  must  be  subordinate  to  the  criminal  laws 
of  the  country,  passed  with  reference  to  actions  regarded  by  general 
consent  as  properly  the  subjects  of  punitive  legislation.  There  have 
beer,  sects  which  denied  as  a  part  of  their  religious  tenets  that  there 
should  be  any  marriage  tie,  and  advocated  promiscuous  intercourse  of 
the  sexes  as  prompted  by  the  passions  of  its  members.  And  history  dis- 
closes the  fact  that  the  necessity  of  human  sacrifices,  on  special  occa- 
sions, has  been  a  tenet  of  many  sects.  Should  a  sect  of  either  of  these 
kinds  ever  find  its  way  into  this  country,  swift  punishment  would  follow 
the  carrying  into  effect  of  its  doctrines,  and  no  heed  would  be  given  to 
the  pretense  that,  as  religious  beliefs,  their  supporters  could  be  pro- 
tected in  their  exercise  by  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  Prob- 
ably never  before  in  the  history  of  this  country  has  it  been  seriously 
contended  that  the  whole  punitive  power  of  the  Government  for  acts, 
recognized  by  the  general  consent  of  the  Christian  world  in  modern 
times  as  proper  matters  for  prohibitory  legislation,  must  be  suspended 
in  order  that  the  tenets  of  a  religious  sect  encouraging  crime  may  be 
carried  out  without  hindrance. 

In  construing  the  restrictive  laws  of  State  legislatures  the 
State  courts  have  sometimes  held  that  they  should  not  be  con- 
strued as  prohibiting  the  practice  of  healing  by  other  than 
medical  practitioners,  because  the  intention  to  legislate  against 
the  liberties  of  the  citizen  should  not  be  assumed.  In  the  case 
of  Nelson  v.  State  Board  of  Health  (22  Ky.,  Law  Rep.,  438)  the 
attempt  was  made  to  prevent  an  osteopath  from  practicing  his 
profession  in  that  State  because  he  had  not  procured  a  license 
to  practice  from  the  board  of  health.  The  court  held  that  the 
osteopath  was  not  within  the  terms  of  the  statute,  because  he 
was  not  practicing  medicine,  and  said: 

If  the  net  applied  to  appellant,  he  can  in  no  case  practice  his  system 
in  this  State,  for,  however  well  qualified  he  may  be,  he  can  not  be  ex- 
amined for  license  as  a  physician,  and  he  could  not,  without  abandon- 
ing  his   practice   as   an  osteopath,   obtain    a   diploma   from   a    medical 
41917—10909 


73 

college.  If  the  statute  applies  to  him,  it  also  applies  to  trained 
nurses  and  all  others  of  that  class  who  for  compensation  administer  to 
the  wants  of  the  sick.  The  result  of  such  a  construction  of  the  statute 
would  be  to  compel  everyone,  whether  willing  or  unwilling,  to  employ  a 
registered  physician  to  care  for  him  when  he  is  sick,  or  to  trust  himself 
entirely  to  gratuitous  services,  however  much  he  might  prefer  skillful 
nursing  to  medical  treatment.  It  is  doubtful  if  the  legislature  has  tha 
right  under  the  Constitution  thus  to  restrict  the  free  choice  of  the 
citizen  in  a  matter  concerning  only  himself  and  not  the  people  at  large. 
Taking  the  statute  as  a  whole,  we  do  not  think  that  this  was  within 
the  legislative  intent,  or  that  the  act  was  designed  to  do  more  than, 
regulate  the  practice  of  medicine  by  physicians  and  surgeons. 

The  case  of  State  v.  Mylod  (20  11.  I.,  632)  is  to  the  same 
effect.  In  that  case  it  was  said : 

It  follows  therefore  that  the  acts  complained  of  are  excluded  from 
the  operation  of  said  Cap.  165  unless  the  words  "  practice  of  medi- 
cine," taken  in  their  ordinary  or  popular  meaning,  includes  them,  or 
unless  it  appears  from  said  chapter  that  the  legislative  intent  was  to 
give  to  said  words  a  meaning  broader  and  more  inclusive  than  the 
popular  one. 

Medicine,  in  the  popular  sense,  is  a  remedial  substance.  The  practice 
of  medicine,  as  ordinarily  or  popularly  understood,  has  relation  to  the 
art  of  preventing,  curing,  or  alleviating  disease  or  pain.  It  rests  largely 
in  the  sciences  of  anatomy,  physiology,  and  hygiene ;  it  requires  a 
knowledge  of  disease,  its  origin,  its  anatomical  and  physiological  fea- 
tures, and  its  causative  relations  ;  and,  further,  it  requires  a  knowledge 
of  drugs,  their  preparation  and  action.  Popularly  it  consists  in  the 
discovery  of  the  cause  and  nature  of  disease  and  the  administration  of 
remedies  or  the  prescribing  of  treatment  therefor. 

Prayer  for  those  suffering  from  disease,  or  words  of  encouragement  or 
the  teaching  that  disease  will  disappear  and  physical  perfection  be 
attained  as  a  result  of  prayer  or  that  humanity  will  be  brought  into 
harmony  with  God  by  right  thinking  and  a  fixed  determination  to  look 
on  the  bright  side  of  life,  does  not  constitute  the  practice  of  medicine 
in  the  popular  sense. 

******* 

*  *  *  While  it  true  that  the  study  and  treatment  of  mental  dis- 
ease constitute  one  of  the  departments  or  branches  of  medicine  in 
which  the  influence  of  the  mind  over  the  body  is  recognized,  yet  mere 
words  of  encouragement,  prayer  for  divine  assistance,  or  the  teaching 
of  Christian  Science  as  testified,  in  the  opinion  of  the  couvt,  does  not 
constitute  the  practice  of  medicine  in  either  of  its  branches  in  the 
statutory  or  popular  sense. 

To  give  to  the  words  "  practice  of  medicine  "  the  construction  claimed 
for  them  by  the  State,  in  the  opinion  of  the  court,  would  lead  to  un- 
intended results.  The  testimony  shows  that  Christian  Scientists  are  a 
recognized  sect  or  school.  They  hold  common  beliefs,  accept  the  same 
teachings,  recognize  as  true  the  same  theories  and  principles.  If  the 
practice  of  Christian  Science  is  the  practice  of  medicine,  Christian 
Science  is  a  school  or  system  of  medicine,  and  is  entitled  to  recognition 
l>y  the  State  hoard  of  health  to  the  same  extent  as  other  schools  or 
systems  of  medicine.  Under  said  Cap.  165  it  can  not  be  discrimi- 
nated against,  and  its  members  are  entitled  to  certificates  to  practice 
medicine  provided  they  possess  the  statutory  qualifications.  The  stat- 
ute, in  conferring  upon  the  State  board  of  health  authority  to  pas* 
upon  the  qualification  of  applicants  for  such  certificates,  does  not  confer 
upon  said  board  arbitrary  power.  The  board  can  not  determine  which 
school  or  system  of  medicine  in  its  theories  and  the  practices  is  right ; 
it  can  only  determine  whether  the  applicant  possesses  the  statutory 
qualification  to  practice  in  accordance  with  the  re-cognized  theories  of  a 
particular  school  or  system. 

It  would  be  absurd  to  hold  that  under  sni'l  Cap.  1C5,  which  pro- 
vides against  discrimination,  the  requirements  necessary  to  entitle  an 
applicant  to  a  certificate  were  such  that  the  members  of  a  particular 
school  or  system  could  not  comply  with  them,  thus  adopting  a  con- 
struction which  would  operate  not  as  a  discrimination  only,  hut  as  a 
prohibition.  On  the  other  hand,  to  hold  that  a  person  who  does  not 
know  or  pretend  to  know  anything  about  disease,  or  about  the  met  IKK! 
of  ascertaining  the  presence  or  the  nature  of  disease,  or  about  the 
nature,  preparation,  or  use  of  drugs  or  remedies,  and  who  never  ad- 
ministers them,  may  ohtni'i  a  certificate  to  practice  medjclne,  is  to  hold 
that  the  operation  of  the  statute  is  to  defeat  the  beneficial  purposes  for 
which  it  wj.s  enacted. 
41917-  1G9G9 


74 

The  case  of  State  v.  McKnight  (131  N.  C.)  was  another 
action  affecting  the  right  of  an  osteopathic  practitioner  to  prac- 
tice without  a  license.  The  court  in  that  case  used  this  lan- 
guage : 

The  State  has  not  restricted  the  cure  of  the  body  to  the  practice  of 
medicine  and  surgery — "  allopathy,"  as  it  is  termed — nor  required  that 
before  anyone  can  be  treated  for  any  bodily  ill  the  physician  must 
have  acquired  a  competent  knowledge  of  allopathy  and  be  licensed  by 
those  skilled  therein.  To  do  that  would  be  to  limit  progress  by  estab- 
lishing allopathy  as  the  State  system  of  healing  and  forbidding  all 
others.  This  would  be  as  foreign  to  our  system  as  a  State  church  for 
the  cure  of  souls.  All  the  State  has  done  has  been  to  enact  that  when 
one  wishes  to  practice  "  medicine  or  surgery  "  he  must,  as  a  protec- 
tion to  the  public — not  to  the  doctors — be  examined  and  licensed  by 
those  skilled  in  "  surgery  and  medicine."  To  restrict  all  healing  to 
that  one  kind — to  allopathy — excluding  homeopathy,  osteopathy,  and  all 
other  treatments,  might  be  a  protection  to  doctors  in  "  surgery  and 
medicine,"  but  that  is  not  the  object  of  the  act,  and  might  make  it 
unconstitutional,  because  creating  a  monopoly. 

The  State  can  only  regulate  for  the  protection  of  the  public.  There 
Is  also  "  divine  science  "  (which  some  one  has  said  is  neither  divine 
nor  a  science),  and  there  may  be  other  methods  still.  Whether  these 
shall  be  licensed  and  regulated  is  a  matter  for  the  lawmaking  power 
to  determine  before  any  question  in  that  respect  can  come  before  the 
court.  Certainly  a  statute  requiring  examination  and  license  "  before 
beginning  the  practice  of  medicine  or  surgery  "  neither  regulates  nor 
forbids  any  mode  of  treatment  which  absolutely  excludes  medicines  and 
surgery  from  its  pathology. 

Mr.  President,  this  confirms  what  I  have  already  said — that 
where  the  statute  provides  in  terms  for  the  regulation  of  the 
practice  of  medicine  and  surgery  schools  of  practitioners  who 
do  not  resort  to  the  use  of  drugs  or  the  knife  are  not  affected 
and  therefore  not  interested  in  its  enforcement.  But  the  trouble 
is  that  in  many  of  these  laws  the  definition  of  "  practicing  medi- 
cine "  includes  all  kinds  of  healing  or  treatment,  thus  avoiding 
Ihe  effect  of  the  decided  cases  on  the  subject.  So  in  such  cases 
the  question  becomes  one  of  the  constitutionality  of  the  law. 
No  one  should  question  the  constitutional  right  of  tha  States 
to  regulate  the  "  practice  of  medicine  and  surgery."  Certainly 
I  do  not.  Anyone  who  practices  the  use  of  drugs  or  the  knife 
.should  establish  his  competency  in  that  respect.  The  legislature 
of  a  State  would  undoubtedly  have  the  right,  also,  to  regulate 
the  practice  of  Christian  Science  by  providing  for  the  establish- 
ment of  a  board  of  examiners  to  determine  their  fitness  and  com- 
petency to  practice  that  mode  of  healing.  But  the  board  should, 
of  course,  have  knowledge  of  the  qualifications  necessary  for 
such  practice. 

Christian  Scientists  would  welcome  such  a  law,  as  they  desire 
that  only  persons  competent  and  conscientious  should  practice 
their  mode  of  healing.  What  they  and  different  schools  of  medi- 
cine object  to  is  that  they  shall  be  examined  as  to  their  com- 
petency to  practice  a  means  of  healing  in  which  they  do  not 
believe  and  in  which  they  do  not  claim  to  be  efficient  or  com- 
petent. The  result  of  such  a  law  is  to  compel  an  examination 
as  to  their  competency  to  practice  a  system  of  healing,  not  with 
any  view  of  determining  their  fitness  to  practice  what  they 
make  claim  to  practice. 

That  means  simple  prohibition  just  as  effectually  as  if  the 
statute  provided  in  terms  that  a  Christian  Scientist  shall  not 
practice  healing  or  the  amelioration  of  suffering.  This  dis- 
tinction was  recognized  in  the  State  v.  Wilcox  (04  Kans.,  789), 
41917— 109C9 


75 

In  which  the  court,  having  held  that  the  State  had  the  power 
to  regulate  the  practice  of  medicine,  said  further : 

The  act  Is  not  invalid  because  it  provides  that  "  Nothing  in  this  act 
shall  be  construed  as  interfering  with  any  religious  beliefs  in  the  treat- 
ment of  diseases,  providing  that  quarantine  regulations  relating  to  con- 
tagious diseases  are  not  infringed  upon."  (Sec.  G,  Gen.  Stat.,  1901,  par. 
GG74.)  The  express  exclusion  of  the  element  of  religious  belief  in  the 
application  of  the  law  was  hardly  necessary.  Religious  freedom  is 
guaranteed  by  the  Constitution,  and  without  mention  in  the  statute 
would  have  been  implied,  and  we  can  see  nothing  in  this  provision 
which  makes  an  illegal  discrimination  against  or  in  favor  of  any  class 
of  physicians. 

This  language  is  significant.  It  expressly  recognizes  the  fact 
that  religious  freedom  exercised  in  the  way  of  healing  can  not 
be  abridged  under  the  Constitution. 

Mr,  President,  the  question  of  both  the  constitutionality  and 
Justice  of  some  of  the  bills  enacted  by  State  legislation  intended 
to  restrict  or  prohibit  the  practice  of  healing  by  Christian  Sci- 
entists have  been  commented  upon  by  the  governors  of  some  of 
the  States  in  veto  messages.  Thus  Gov.  Mickey,  of  Nebraska, 
has  this  to  say  in  one  of  his  veto  messages : 

The  constitution  of  the  State  of  Nebraska  declares  that  "all  persona 
have  a  natural  and  indefeasible  right  to  worship  Almighty  God  accord- 
Ing  to  the  dictates  of  their  own  consciences,"  and  further  adds,  "  nor 
shall  any  interference  with  the  rights  of  conscience  be  permitted."  IB 
the  Christian  Science  religion  the  idea  of  worship  and  of  divine  healing 
are  so  intermingled  that  it  is  impossible  to  draw  the  line  of  demarcation, 
and  hence  interference  with  the  one  or  the  other  is,  an  interference  with 
"  the  rights  of  conscience  "  and.  thus  becomes  an  infringement  of  th« 
constitutional  guaranty  of  religious  freedom. 

And  GOT.  Peabody,  of  Colorado,  used  this  language  in  a  mes- 
sage vetoing  such  a  bill : 

Guided  by  the  late  experience  of  similar  legislation  In  other  States, 
the  conclusion  is  irresistible  that  all  such  legislation  has  a  tendency  to 
restrict  the  citizen  in  the  employment  of  whomsoever  he  pleases  in  th« 
treatment  of  his  diseases,  and  it  also  has  a  tendency  to  build  up,  under 
the  protection  of  the  State,  a  trust  or  combination  9f  certain  schools  ol 
medicine  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others  equally  meritorious. 

Gov.  Thomas,  of  the  same  State,  in  a  like  case,  used  this  clear 
and  emphatic  language: 

The  department  of  surgery  excepted,  medicine  Is  not  a  science.  It  In 
a.  series  of  experiments,  more  or  less  successful,  and  will  become  a 
science  when  the  laws  of  health  and  disease  are  fully  ascertained  and 
understood.  This  can  be  done,  not  by  arresting  the  progress  of  experi- 
ment and  binding  men  down  to  hard  and  fast  rules  of  treatment,  but  by 
giving  free  rein  to  the  man  who  departs  from  the  beaten  highway  and 
discovers  hidden  methods  and  remedies  by  the  wayside.  *  •  * 

The  true  intent  and  purpose  of  the  bill  is  to  restrict  the  profession 
of  medicine  to  the  three  schools  therein  mentioned,  and  then  limit  the 
number  of  practitioners  to  suit  the  judgment  of  the  composite  board. 
People  desiring  medical  or  surgical  service  may  employ  its  licentiates 
or  die  without  the  consolation  of  the  healer.  This  is  but  to  say  that 
a  medical  trust  is  to  be  established  which  shall  regulate  demand  and 
supply  by  absolute  control  of  the  product  which  forms  its  basis,  the 
general  assembly  furnishing  the  appliances  whereby  the  trust  shall 
beeorue  effectual. 

The  integrity  and  usefulness  of  every  profession  must  be  guaranteed 
to  society,  which  may  establish  standards  for  the  members  thereof  and 
for  the  observance  of  which  its  sanction  should  be  given.  Beyond  this, 
each  profession  takes  care  of  itself,  and  legislative  interference  is 
tyranny,  open  or  disguised.  *  *  * 

The  fundamental  vice  of  the  bill  is  that  it  denies  absolutely  to  the 
individual  the  right  to  select  his  own  physician.  This  is  a  right  of 
conscience,  and  as  sacred  as  that  which  enables  the  citizen  to  worship 
God  as  he  may  desire.  It  is,  indeed,  the  same  right  manifesting  itself 
in  a  parallel  direction.  It  is  a  part  of  the  law  of  this  land,  and  no 
41917—10909 


76 

civil  power  is  strong  enough  to  deprive  the  citizen  of  its  exercise.  He 
may,  indeed,  select  a  healer  of  d9ubtful  reputation  or  conceded  incom- 
petence, but  that  is  bis  affair  just  as  much  as  is  his  choice  of  a 
minister  or  attorney.  His  action  may  prove  injurious,  possibly  fatal, 
to  himself  or  to  some  members  of  his  family.  It  is  better  so  'than  to 
delegate  to  any  tribunal  the  power  to  say  "  thou  shalt  not  employ  this 
man  "  or  "  thou  shalt  employ  this  one."  That  this  bill  produces  such 
u  result  indirectly  makes  it  the  more  objectionable.  It  is  not  the  out- 
spoken and  aggressive  assault  upon  individual  liberty  that  men  should 
fear,  but  the  indirect  or  resultant  blow  that  is  masked  and  falls  unex- 
pectedly. 

The  bill,  like  all  kindred  forms  of  paternalism,  assumes  that  the 
citizen  can  not  take  care  of  himself.  The  State  must  lead  him  as  a. 
little  child,  lest  he  fall  into  trouble  unawares.  He  must  be  guarded 
and  chided,  limited  here  and  licensed  there,  for  bis  own  protection. 
Such  a  system,  born  of  the  union  of  church  and  state,  crumbles  into 
ashes  in  the  crucible  of  experience.  It  can  not  flourish,  though  dis- 
guised in  the  garments  of  an  alleged  public  necessity.  The  privilege  of 
choosing  one's  own  physician  is  a  positive  essential  to  the  public  health. 
Yet  this  bill  assumes  to  thrust  the  coarse  machinery  of  the  criminal  law 
Into  one  of  the  most  sacred  relations  of  human  life,  to  drag  the  chosen 
physician,  if  unlicensed,  from  the  sick  couch  to  the  prison  cell,  and  to 
substitute  for  him  some  one  who,  however  exalted  and  honorable,  may 
not  command  the  confidence  or  secure  the  sympathy  of  his  patient. 

These  comments  are  not  extreme,  for  it  must  be  remembered  that 
those  who  bolicve  in  and  patronize  the  various  arts  of  healing  that  are 
ostracized  by  this  bill  form  a  very  large  part  of  every  community,  nor 
are  they  confined  to  the  ignorant  and  superstitious  portions  of  society. 
They  number  in  their  ranks  thousands  of  the  most  refined,  intelligent, 
and  conscientious  people.  They  recognize  in  many  modern  forms  of 
relief  to  the  suffering  a  religious  or  spiritual  element  that  appeals  to 
their  best  and  tenderest  sympathies.  The  benefits  they  claim  and  the 
cures  they  narrate  are  not  imaginary.  Shall  the  Government  enact  by 
statute  that  these  people  shall  not  longer  enjoy  their  benefits  or  put 
them  into  daily  practice?  Shall  it  officially  declare  these  people  to  be 
criminally  wrong  and  the  three  schools  legally  right?  By  what 
authority  docs  it  so  declare? 

A  distinguished  physician  of  Massachusetts  has  recently  declared 
with  force  that  "  the  Commonwealth  has  no  right  to  a  medical  opinion 
and  should  not  dare  to  take  sides  in  a  medical  controversy."  It  would 
be  as  consistent  to  take  sides  in  a  theological  or  philosophical  discus- 
sion. The  one  would  he  condemned  by  all  men  ;  the  other  is  equally 
foreign  to  the  province  of  government.  It  may  regulate  but  can  not 
prohibit  the  calling  of  the  citizens  ;  it  may  prevent  the  commission  of 
wrongs  but  can  not  deprive  the  individual  of  the  right  to  choose  his  own 
advise  rs. 

Mr.  President,  I  am  about  to  conclude  what  I  have  to  say.  I 
have  taken  up, too  much  of  the  time  of  the  Senate.  But  I  could 
not  remain  silent  when  the  liberties  of  the  people  and  the  con- 
stitutional rights  of  the  States  are  threatened.  There  has  been 
no  legislation  more  dangerous  or  pernicious  than  the  entire  sys- 
tem of  laws,  State  and  National,  that  are  being  forced  upon  the 
people  of  this  country  by  the  political  doctors,  who  are  consider- 
ing only  their  own  selfish  interests  without  regard  to  the  public 
welfare.  I  have  considered  not  only  the  bill  now  before  the 
Senate  but  legislation  in  the  States,  because  they  are  a  part  of 
one  general  effort  to  procure  legislation  that  will  establish  for- 
ever one  school  of  medicine  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others. 

If  this  effort  is  successful  it  will  create  the  worst,  the  most 
Intolerant,  and  the  most  dangerous  monopoly  and  trust  the 
country  has  'ever  known.  It  will  be  the  more  intolerant  and 
offensive,  as  well  as  more  powerful,  because  it  is  a  trust  created 
by  law  and  supported  by  all  the  powers  of  the  Government. 
The  author  of  the  bill  has  graciously  consented  to  amend  it  so 
as  to  provide  £hat  there  shall  be  no  discrimination  in  favor  of  or 
against  any  school  of  medicine.  He  could  very  well  do  this. 
It  is  a  perfectly  harmless  and  useless  provision  and  will  pro- 
tect no  one.  Does  anyone  suppose  that  this  bureau,  made  inde- 
41917—10969 


77 

pendent  by  this  bill,  with  an  allopathic  doctor  at  its  head,  and 
without  doubt  a  member  of  the  American  Medical  Association, 
will  give  any  consideration  to  any  mode  of  healing  that  does 
110 1  use  drugs,  or  not  discriminate  against  them,  and  in  favor 
of  the  regular  school  of  medicine?  Can  anyone  think  so  when 
we  look  back  over  the  past  few  years  and  see  how  these  very 
same  doctors  of  the  regular  school  have  been  using  every 
possible  means  to  procure  such  laws  as  will  not  only  discrim- 
inate against  but  actually  exterminate  thorn?  Now,  it  is  pro- 
posed to  take  the  medical  bureaus  and  others  in  any  way  con- 
rnvted  with  the  preservation  of  the  public  health  out  of  the 
departments  and  bring  them  under  one  control,  independent  and 
autocratic.  What  may  be  expected  to  happen?  Why,  with  this 
unlimited  power  in  his  hands,  with  the  right  to  make  rules  and 
regulations  for  the  government  of  his  department,  he  will  do, 
by  his  rules  and  regulations,  just  what  he  and  his  fellow 
doctors  have  for  years  been  trying  to  get  the  States  to  do  by 
law,  declare  the  practice  of  Christian  Science  and  other  modes 
of  healing  that  they  have  condemned  as  a  menace  to  the  public 
health  and  suppress  such  practice.  You  say  he  is  not  allowed 
to  discriminate  or  to  interfere  with  the  practice  of  medicine ! 

Why,  Mr.  President,  if  he  is  honest,  and  has  been  honest  in 
promoting  restrictive  and  prohibitive  legislation  in  the  States 
against  such  practices,  he  will  say:  "  I  must  protect  the  public 
health.  That  is  the  prime  duty  imposed  upon  me  by  this  law. 
To  do  it  I  must  destroy  the  tendency  to  put  away  drugs  and 
resort  to  quacks  and  charlatans.  They  are  not  entitled  to  pro- 
tection. I  will  do  my  duty  and  suppress  them  in  every  way 
possible."  If  anyone  supposes  that  ways  will  not  be  found  to 
accomplish  this  result,  with  a  doctor  in  control  and  at  the  head 
of  a  bureau  that  is  independent  of  control  by  any  higher  power, 
he  does  not  appreciate  the  capacity  of  the  regular  school  of 
medicine  to  maintain  itself  by  the  destruction  of  other  means 
of  healing. 

Mr.  President,  as  I  have  said,  this  whole  movement  is  by 
and  in  the  interest  of  doctors  of  the  regular  school.  No  one  else 
is  demanding  this  law.  They  have  manipulated  political  con- 
ventions and  procured  a  plank  in  the  platform  of  both  of  the 
great  political  parties,  declaring  in  favor  of  establishing  a  de- 
partment of  health,  with  its  head  a  member  of  the  Cabinet. 
They  have  besieged  the  White  House  and  pleaded  for  assistance 
from  the  President.  They  have  infested  the  Halls  of  Congress 
for  years  past  in  the  effort  to  secure  the  passage  of  laws  that 
would  place  them  in  power  and  give  them  absolute  control  of 
the  medical  activities  of  the  Government.  In  pressing  forward 
this  bold  scheme  they  have  tried  to  deceive  the  public,  and  have 
largely  succeeded,  by  claiming  that  such  legislation  is  in  the 
public  interest.  They  insist  that  their  mode  of  healing  is  the 
only  safe  or  reliable  one,  and  that  to  resort  to  any  other  is  to 
endanger  the  public  health. 

Their  efforts  have  of  late  been  directed  chiefly  against  Chris- 
tian Scientists  and  their  mode  of  practice.  They  insist  that  the 
practice  of  their  mode  of  healing  is  a  fraud  on  the  people  and 
a  menace  to  the  public  health.  Why,  Mr.  President,  I  could  by 
a  mere  call  fill  this  Capitol  Building  with  conscientious  and  re- 
liable men  and  women,  people  of  high  character  and  UL-ques- 

41917— 109G9 


78 

tioned  sincerity,  who  would  bear  witness  to  their  healing  bj 
this  means  and  their  faith  in  its  efficacy.  Thousands  of  these 
many  of  them  within  my  own  personal  knowledge,  have  been 
healed  of  what  the  doctors  call  incurable  diseases,  and  many 
of  them  after  the  doctors  had  given  up  their  cases  as  !]>• 

Naturally  these  people  protest  against  any  law 'that  will  de- 
prive them,  or  anyone  else,  of  the  right  to  resort  to  this  remedy 
for  their  relief.  In  the  name  of  these  people,  in  the  name  of 
those  believing  in  other  modes  of  healing,  in  the  name  of  a 
liberty-loving  people,  I  protest  against  any  law  or  regulat'.on 
that  will  deny  them  the  right  or  abridge  their  liberty  to  give  or 
accept  relief  of  their  choice,  or  their  religious  rights. 
41917—101)09 

o 


THE  LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
LOS  ANGELES 


This  i 


00™    —st  date  stamped  below. 


! 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

305  De  Neve  Drive  -  Parking  Lot  17  •  Box  951388 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA  90095-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library  from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


